G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.14  
G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.22  
 
28 February 2 022 
(22-1897) Page: 1/48 
Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures    
 
ANNUAL OVERVIEW – IMPLEMENTATION OF SPS TRANSPARENCY PROVISIONS AND 
SPECIFIC TRADE CONCERNS  
NOTE BY THE SECRETARIAT1 
Revision  
1  INTRODUCTION  
1.1.  At its meeting on 15 -16 March 2000, the Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures 
(the SPS Committee) requested the Secretariat to prepare a paper summarizing the specific trade 
concerns (STCs) that had been brought to the Committee's attention since 1995.2 Since then, the 
Secretariat has revised document G/SPS/GEN/204  annually to include new information provided by 
Members. 
1.2.  Similarly, at  the October 2007 Workshop on Transparency , the Committee requ ested the 
Secretariat to prepare an annual overview of the implementation of the transparency pro visions of 
the SPS  Agreement.3 Since then, the Secretariat has revised document G/SPS/GEN/804  annually to 
provid e an overview of the level of implementation of the transparency obligations contained in the 
SPS Agreement (Article 7 and Annex B) and of the Committee's Recommended Procedures for 
Implementing the Transparency Obligations of the SPS Agreement ( G/SPS/7/Rev.4 ). 
1.3.  Since 202 14, the information previously contained in G/SPS/GEN/804  and G/SPS/GEN/204  and 
revisions has been  merged into a sin gle document, i n an effort to improve the reports , to provide a 
more comprehensive view of both the implementation of transparency provisions and the STCs 
raised in the Committee, and to align the periods of time covered (i.e. from January to December), 
and with the aim of harmonizing reporting practices with those of the Committee on Technical 
Barriers to Trade (TBT) . 
1.4.  As such, Part A  of the present  document provides an overview of the level of implementation 
of the transparency obligations found in the SPS Agreement  (previously contained in the 
G/SPS/GEN/804  document series) and Part B  contains information on STCs  (previously contained in 
the G/SPS/GEN/204  document series) . Additionally, Part C  of the document covers  other 
transparency -related aspects, including the transparency recommendations of the Fifth Review  of 
the Operation and Implementation of the S PS Agreement  adopted in 20205, detailed information on 
improved SPS IT tools  and the transparency -related work  of the Standards and Trade Development 
Facility (STDF).  
1.5.  In preparing this document, the Secretariat has largely relied on the SPS Information 
Management System (SPS IMS) . The SPS IMS is a specialized and detailed information source on 
SPS notifications, STCs, national notification authorities (NNAs) and national enquiry points (NEPs) 
contact information, and other SPS  documents. It allows for advanced searches according t o specific 
 
1 This document has been prepared under the Secretariat's own responsibility and is without prejudice to 
the positions of Members or to their rights and obligations under the WTO.  
2 G/SPS/R/18 , para. 20.  
3 See G/SPS/R/47 , para. 44, for the recommendations arising from the 2007 Workshop on 
Transparency. See also footnote 4 of G/SPS/7/Rev.4  requesting the Sec retariat to provide an annual report on 
the level of implementation of the transparency provisions of the SPS Agreement and of the recommended 
transparency procedures.  
4 As announced the SPS Committee informal consultations held on 16 September 2020 , JOB/SPS/10 . 
5 See G/SPS/64  and G/SPS/64/Add.1 . G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 2 - 
 
  criteria and also facilitates the creation of custom reports and graphs, which can be shared with 
interested stakeholders. Most of the underlying data for the analysis contained in this document is 
publicly available and searchable through the S PS IMS.  
1.6.  While some histori cal data on notifications dating back to 1995 has been retrieved from various 
internal sources and incorporated into the SPS IMS, some of the more detailed analys es have only 
been possible as of July 2007, when the SPS IMS became operational. An improved version of the 
SPS IMS was launched at the end of March 2017 , which , combined with streamlin ed internal 
processes in the Secretariat, has enabled data analysis to become more automatic.  The Secretariat 
is currently working on unify ing all SPS online tools under one platform integrating SPS and 
TBT tools. Further information on these and other IT tools, as well as on other transparency 
resources, is available in Part C  of the present document.  
1.7.  In 2021, th e Members' transparency toolkit  webpage was updated to streamline the 
information available. A new publication , SPS Agreement: 10 key results from 2020 , was made  
available on the transparency toolkit  page, highlighting 10 transparency -related results from the 
previous revision of this docume nt, including on notifications and STCs.  Likewise, a new quiz  was 
also made available on the Members' transparency toolkit  page, allowing users to test their 
knowledge on SPS transparency -related matters . 
1.8.  Some key conclusions extracted from the present document are the following:  
a. Overall, there is a high level of impl ementation of the SPS Agreement transparency 
obligations  by WTO Members. Since 1995: 129 Members ( 79% of membership) have 
submitted at least one notification ; 161 (98%) and 163 Members (99%) have provided 
contact information for their SPS NNAs  and NEPs, respectively . Additionally, 14 Members 
have updated their contact details during 2021 . 
b. In 202 1, 63 Members submitted 1,825 notifications  of new or modified  SPS measures , 
including addenda and corrigenda to b oth regular and emergency notifications . 
c. A record number of addenda to emergency  notifications ( 100) was submitted in 202 1, mostly 
to inform on  the modification of content and/or scope of previously notified draft 
regulation . 
d. The share of regular and emergency notifications submitted by developing Members  is higher 
than the share submitted by developed Members  since 2008 and 2002, respectively . 
e. Asia (33%), followed by South and Central America and the Caribbean (26%) and 
North  America ( 11%) are the regions that have submitted the highest share of notifications 
since 1995 . 
f. Tanzania , a least-developed Member  (LDC), is among the top 10 notifiers of regular 
notifications in 202 1. 
g. In 202 1, as in previous years, the highest share ( 65%) of regular notifications submitted 
refer to food safety ; 90% of the emergency notifications submitted refer to animal he alth. 
h. The share  of trade facilitating  measures notified in 202 1 is more than twice as high as in 
2017. 
i. In 2021 , Members have submitted 23 notifications and 7 communications informing of 
COVID -19 related SPS measures . 
j. A total of 59% of the 268 emergency notifications submitted in 2021  referred to avian 
influenza . 
k. The number of new STCs raised does not follow an increasing trend over time, despite the 
overall increasing trend  in the number of notifications . There is no apparent correlation 
between the number of notifications submitted per year and the number of  new STCs raised . 
l. A total o f 532 STCs have been raised since 1995. In 2021, Members discussed 64 STCs , 
including 27 new concerns . The number of 50 previously raised STCs discussed again in 
2021 represents a historical maximum since 1995 . 
m. In 2021, STCs related to "Other concerns ", such as approval procedures, represented 48%  of 
the new concerns raised. Concerns relative to food safety  represent ed 30% of the new STCs 
raised, and concerns related to animal health and plant health each represented 11% of the 
new STCs discussed in 2021 . 
n. Since 1995, 6 5 Members (4 0%) have raised at least one STC in the SPS Committee. In  2021, 
25 Members ( 15%) raised at least one STC . 
o. The average number of times that STCs have been raised is 2. 8. 
p. Participati on of developing Members  raising and supporting STCs, as well as responding  to 
STCs, is higher than that of developed Members . G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 3 - 
 
  q. In 2021, STC 515 on the authorization of Federal Inspection Type establishments was 
reported  as resolved. D etails on the partial resolution of STC 193 were provided . A total of 
197 (37%) of STCs hav e been reported as resolved, and 74 (14%) as partially resolved  since 
1995. 
r. The number of Members using the SPS Notification Submission System (SPS NSS) to 
submit notifications increased in 2021. Of all SPS notifications,  90% were submitted using 
the SPS NSS, up from 84% in 20 20. 
s. The u se of ePing  is also increasing. The number of subscribers grew to 15,443 from 
184 countries at the end of 2021, up from 12,360  from 182  countries at the end of 20 20. 
t. In 202 1, the SPS Committee regularly used the eAgenda  platform to add agenda items and 
to raise concerns . More than 300 users from 7 7 Members have requested access and added 
interventions, raised STCs and uploaded statements before the meeting s, significantly 
enhancing transparency before and during  Committee meeting s. 
u. The new ePing SPS&TBT Platform , integrating SPS and TBT IT tools, will be pilot tested 
by Members in the first quarter of 2022 and launched during the year.  
 
 
 G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 4 - 
 
  Contents  
 
NOTE BY THE SECRETARIAT  ................................ ................................ .............................  1 
1   INTRODUCTION  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..........  1 
2   PART A - IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRANSPARENCY PROVISIONS  ............................  5 
2.1   DESIGNATION OF NOTIFICATION AUTHORITIES AND ENQUIRY PO INTS ............................  5 
2.2   SUBMISSION OF NOTIFICATIONS  ................................ ................................ ................  5 
2.2.1   Types of notifications  ................................ ................................ ..............................  5 
2.2.2   Notifying Members  ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 7 
2.2.3   Products covered  ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 12 
2.2.4   Regions/countries affected  ................................ ................................ ......................  13 
2.2.5   Objective and rationale  ................................ ................................ ...........................  14 
2.2.6   Relationship between the objective of the measure and the regions/countries affected  ..... 15 
2.2.7   International standards, guidelines or recommendations  ................................ ..............  17 
2.2.8   Proposed date of adoption/publication/entry into force  ................................ ................  19 
2.2.9   Final date for comments  ................................ ................................ .........................  20 
2.2.10    Addenda to regular and emergency notifications  ................................ .......................  21 
2.3   NOTIFICATION KEYWORDS  ................................ ................................ ........................  23 
2.4   COVID -19 RELATED NOTIFICATIONS AND DOCUMENTS  ................................ .................  24 
3   PART B - SPECIFIC TRADE CONCERNS  ................................ ................................ ....... 25 
3.1   General overview of specific trade concerns (1995 -2021)  ................................ ...............  26 
3.2   Specific trade concerns considered in 2021  ................................ ................................ ... 33 
3.2.1   Resolution of STCs in 2021  ................................ ................................ ......................  35 
4   PART C – OTHER TRANSPARENCY -RELATED ASPECTS  ................................ ...............  35 
4.1   Transparency recommendations in the Fifth Review  ................................ .......................  35 
4.2   Improvement of SPS IT tools and materials  ................................ ................................ .. 36 
4.2.1   Integration of SPS and TBT IT tools – the new ePing SPS&TBT Platform  .........................  37 
4.2.2   eAgenda  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...............  39 
4.3   Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF)  ................................ ........................  40 
 
 G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 5 - 
 
  2  PART A - IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRANSPARENCY PROVISIONS  
2.1.  Part A of the present document provides an overview regarding the level of implementation of 
the transparency provisions contained in the SPS Agreement  and the Recommended T ransparency 
Procedures in document G/SPS/7/Rev.4  (see previous revisions  of the  G/SPS/GEN/804  document 
series ), with a focus on 2021 . It does not include information on areas where the Secretariat is not 
directly involved (such as publication of a notice of a regulation at an early stage, Members' response 
to requests for documents or other information , provision of  comments to notifications, and of the 
response to  these comments by the notifying Member, among others).  
2.1  DESIGNATION OF NOTIFICATION AUTHORITIES AND ENQUIRY POINTS  
2.2.  Annex B, paragraph 10 of the SPS Agreement requires  Members to designate a single central 
government authority as responsible for the implementation of notification procedures. This agency 
is referred to as the SPS national notification authority  (NNA) . As of 31 December 202 1, 161 (98%) 
WTO Members out of 164 had designated such an agency, two m ore than in the previous reporting 
period. The Members that have not design ated NNAs  are all LDCs.6 
2.3.  Annex B, paragraph 3 of the SPS Agreement requires that each Member establish a  national  
enquiry point (NEP) responsible for the provision of answers to all reasonable questions and of 
relevant documents. As of 31 Decembe r 2021, 163 (99%) WTO Members out of 164 had provided 
the WTO with the contact information of their NEP, one more than last year . One LDC ha s not yet 
established an NEP. Thirty -two Members have identified more than one SPS  NEP. A total of  32 
Members have indicated that their NNA and NEP a re the same institution.  
2.4.  During the reporting period, 14 Members updated their contact details, in some cases following 
technical assistance delivered by the Secretariat. The most up -to-date information on Members' 
NNAs  and NEPs can be accessed through the SPS IMS , and it  is also available through ePing . It can 
be useful to have at least two staff member s trained in NNA/NEP operations as this allows for 
absences and commitments of staff to other duties, as recommended in the Practical Manual for SPS 
National Notification Authorities and National Enquiry Points . Whenever possible, Members are 
encouraged to use an institutional email address rather than a personal one.7 
2.2  SUBMISSION OF NOTIFICATION S 
2.5.  Under the SPS Agreement, notifications are used to inform other Members about new or 
modified  regulations that may significantly affect trade. Annex B, paragraphs 5 to 8, as well as the 
Recommended Transparency Procedures, elaborate on the notification p rocedures Members are to 
follow. For ease of reference, the specific sub -topics highlighted below follow the order of items that 
are contained in the regular and emergency notification formats.  The submission of notifications 
through the SPS NSS further im proves the quality of the information provided, increasing efficiency 
and allowing for better  searches in the SPS IMS.  
2.2.1   Types of notifications  
2.6.  The two main types of notifications are regular notifications and emergency notifications. 
In addition, addenda, c orrigenda, revisions or supplements can be issued subsequent to an original 
regular or emergency notification.8 An addendum is used to provide additional information or 
changes to an original notification, for example if the products covered by the propos ed regulation 
have been modified, if the comment period has been extended, or if a notified measure has entered 
into force. A corrigendum is used to correct an error in an original notification such as an incorrect 
address detail. A revision is used to rep lace an existing notification, for example if a notified draft 
regulation was substantially redrafted or if a notification contained a large number of errors.  All types 
of notifications  can be directly filled in and submitted through the SPS NSS  (see Section 4.2.1.4 ). 
 
6 The categories of level of development rely on WTO working d efinitions as identified in the WTO's 
Integrated Database (IDB) for analytical purposes ( idb@wto.org ). They can be consulted through the SPS IMS 
by clicking on "definitions of groups" on the top menu bar.  
7 Further r ecomm endations can be found in the Practical Manual for SPS NNAs  and NEPs. 
8 See Members' transparency toolkit  and the Recommended Transparency Procedures ( G/SPS/7/Rev.4 ) 
for further elaboration on the different types of notifications.  G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 6 - 
 
  2.7.  Chart A.1 show the number of regular and emergency notifications (including addenda and 
corrigenda) submitted per year since 1995. As of 31 December  2021, Members had submitted9 
19,521 regular notifications, 2, 798 emergency notifications, 6,764 addenda and 577 corrigenda, 
reaching a grand total of 2 9,660 notifications. Despite punctual decreases  in some years, the global 
trend shows an upward trend in  the total number of notifications submitted per year . A historical 
record number of 2,122  notifications  was reach ed in 2020 , despite the global trade challenges 
imposed by the COVID -19 pandemic (see Section 2.5 ). In 2021, a slight decrease in the number of 
notifications was observed compared to the previous year . A total of  1,825 notifications were 
circulated in 2021, including 1,006 regular notificatio ns, 268 emergency notifications, 530 addenda 
and 21 corrigenda. Compared to the previous year, there was a decrease  in the number of  regular 
notifications submitted, from  1,253 in 2020 to 1,006  in 202 1 (21% decrease ), and a similar  number 
of emergency notifications, from 265 in 2020 to 268 in 202 1 (1% increase) . The overall number of 
addenda submitted slightly decreased  from 563 in 2020  to 530 in 2021  (6% decrease ). However, 
while the number of addenda to regular notifications decreased  from 502 in 2020 to 430 in 2021  
(14% decrease) , the number of addenda to emergency notifications showed a sharp increase , also 
reaching a historical maximum  of 100 emergency addenda (compared to 61 in 2020)  (36% increase)  
(see Section 2.3.10 ). These data are summarized in Table A.1 . The monthly average of notifications 
submitted decreased from 181 in 2020 to 152 in 2021.  
Chart A.1 – Regular and emergenc y notif ications, addenda and corrigenda for both types, 
submitted , and number of Members who have submitted at least one notification, per year  
 
 
Table A.1 – SPS notifications submitted by WTO Members  
Type of notification  Since 1995  In 2021  Variation since 
2020  
Regular  19,512  1,006  -21% 
Emergency  2,798  268 +1% 
Addenda to regular  6,108  430 -14% 
Addenda to emergency  656 100 +36%  
Corrigenda to regular  510 17 -37% 
Corrigenda to emergency  67 4 -71% 
Total 29,660  1,825   
 
2.8.  In June 2002, the SPS Committee adopted a special format and recommended procedures for 
the notification of determination of the recognition of equivalence of sanitary or phytosanitary 
measures . As of 31 December  2021, there have been seven equivalence notifications  circulated by 
 
9 For this Note, submission refers to the date of distribution of the notification by the  Secretariat.  
020406080100120140160
05001,0001,5002,000
 Regular  Emergency  Addenda  Corrigenda Members who have submitted at least one notificationG/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 7 - 
 
  Panama ( one, in 2007), the Dominican Republic ( one, in 2008), and the United States ( five, in 2019). 
These more  recent notification s were submitted following the two -part Thematic Session on 
Equivalence held in October 2018 and March 2019 within the framework of the Fifth Review .10 
2.9.  In April 2004, the Secretariat established a mechanism for Members  to inform each other of 
the availability of unofficial translations of notified SPS measures into one of the working  languages 
of the WTO. These are submitted in the form of supplements to the original notification. As of 
31 December 202 1, 19 supplement notifications  had been circulated. None have been submitted 
since 2015. The availability of translations has periodically  been discussed in the SPS Committee 
under transparency -related matters.11 Interestingly,  the same  mechanism for sharing translations 
of notified TB T regulations, launched in January 2008, has resulted in 251  supplement notifications, 
although , similarly to SPS, it has not been used since  2016.  In this context , it is worth  highlight ing 
that Members can also  share  unofficial translations through the ePing alert system , although it has 
not been used for that purpose yet  (see Section 4.2.1.3  in Part  C). 
2.10.  In October 2004, the SPS Committee adopted a procedure to enhance transparency of special 
and differential treatment (S&D) in favour of developing Member s, which included an addendum 
notification format to inform the Committee o f a Member's decision on whether and how S&D may 
be provided in reference to a specific reques t. The procedure and addendum notification format were 
subsequently revised in December 2009  (G/SPS/33/Rev.1 ) and, as mentioned earlier, 
the notification format was incorporated in G/SPS/7/Rev.4  for ease of reference. 
No S&D notifications have been circulated by WTO Members since 2004.  
2.2.2   Notifying Members  
2.11.  As of 31 December 202 1, 129 Members out of 164 ( 79%) had submitted at least one 
notification to the WTO. Several  EU member States have not submitted notifications; however, most 
SPS measures are notified by the European Union on behalf of all its member States.12,13 In addition, 
15 developing Members  and 11 LDCs have not yet submitted any notification.  In 2021, 63 Members 
submitted at least one notification.  The number of Members submitting notifications each  year has 
considerably increased since 1995 and has remain ed relatively stable over the last few years 
(Chart  A.1). 
2.12.  Charts A.2 and A.3 show the number of regular and emergency notifications, respectively, 
and the percentage of notifications by Members' development status. Chart A.2  shows that the share 
of regular notifications submitted by developing Members  has been  rising since 2000 and, since 
2008, is higher than that of regular notifications submitted by developed Members . The share of 
notifications from LDCs is overall very low, but has been increasing over the last few years, reaching 
6.9% in 2021, mainly  due to the high number of notifications submitted by Tanzania (60, Chart A.9) 
and by Uganda (30) . Chart A.3  shows that the percentage o f emergency notifications submitted by 
developing Members  has been greater than 50% since 2002. The difference in percentage  of 
emergency notifications  between developed and developing Members  is much larger than in the case 
of regular notifications.   
2.13.  In 202 1, for regular notifications we can observe a slight in crease in the percentage  submitted 
by developed Member s and a decrease in the case of developing Member s. The figures in 2021 are 
similar  to those in 2019. On the contrary, the opposite pattern is observed in the case of emergency 
notifications , where the decrease in the share sub mitted by developed Member s and the increase in 
the share submitted by developing Member s continue  the trend observed in 2020.  
 
10 The programmes of parts 1 and 2 of the Thematic Session are contained in G/SPS/GEN/1640/Rev.1  
and G/SPS/GEN/1675/Rev.1 , respectively, and the reports in G/SPS/R/93  and G/SPS/R/94 . Presentations of 
both sessions are available at: https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/sps_e/ events_e.htm . 
11 See for example the reports of the Fourth Review and the 2017 Workshop on Transparency  in 
G/SPS/62  and G/SPS/R/89 , respectively.  
12 See G/SPS/GEN/456  for notification p rocedures for the European Union and its member States.  
13 The information provided by the European Union covers its 28 member States from 1  July 2013 until 
31 January  2020. The United Kingdom withdrew from the European Union as of 1  February  2020. 
The European Union and the United Kingdom communicated that during the transition period, which ended on 
31 December  2020, the European Union SPS regime continued to apply in the United Kingdom.  See documents 
WT/GC/206  and G/SPS/GEN/1767 . G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 8 - 
 
  Chart  A.2 – Number of regular notifications and percentage by development status  
 
 
Chart A.3 – Number of emergency notifications and percentage by development status  
 
 
2.14.  Taking a closer look at notifications in 2021, it is interesting to note that, while notifications 
by developing Members  represent 5 9% of regular notifications, plus 7% submitted by LDCs 
(the remaining 3 4% being submitted by developed Members ), the difference is most striking in the 
case of emergency notifications, where 8 7% were submitted by developing Members  compared to 
13% by developed Members  (none were submitted by LDCs) ( Chart A.4 ). Further analysis shows 
that of the 2 33 emergency notifications submitted by developing Members , 217  (93%) indicate 
animal health as an objective  (see Chart A.17 ). 
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
02004006008001,0001,2001,4001,6001,800
Regular Addenda Corrigenda Developed (%) Developing (%) LDCs (%)
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
050100150200250300350400
Emergency Addenda Corrigenda Developed (%) Developing (%) LDCs (%)G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 9 - 
 
  Chart A.4 – Percentage of regular and emergency notifications (excluding addenda and 
corrigenda) b y development status in 2021  
 
 
2.15.  Looking at the geographic  regions from which the notifications submitted since the year 1995 
originate , Chart A.5  shows that the largest share  of notifications come from Asia (28%), followed by 
the North America region (26%) and then by South and Central America and the Caribbean (2 5%).14 
Chart A.5 – Notifications by geographical region since  1995  
 
 
2.16.  When comparing the percentage of notifications submitted in 2021 to the average sub mitted 
by the different regions between 1995 and 202 0, we can observe a striking reduction in the case of 
North America (from 27 % until the end of 202 0 to 11%  in 2021 ). On the contrary, an increase was 
observed in the case of Asia (from 28% to 33%) and South America, Central America and the 
Caribbean (from 24% to 26%). On average, African Members  doubled the percentage of notifications 
(from 4% to 8%) and Members  from the CIS region increased from 2% to 5%  (Chart A. 6). 
As mentioned before, i n the case of Africa, Tanzania (6 0) and Uganda (30) are the Members  that 
have most contributed to the high er percentage of notifications in 2021. In t he case of CIS countries, 
the Russian Federation (52) and Kazakhstan (26) have most contributed to the high er percentage.  
 
14 The geographical groupings used rely on WTO working definitions as identified in the Inte grated 
Database (IDB) for analytical purposes ( idb@wto.org ). The same groupings are used in the WTO Annual Reports. 
They can be consulted through the SPS IMS by clicking on "definitions of groups" on the top menu bar.  
26% North America
25% SA, CA & the Caribbean10% Europe2% CIS4% Africa6%Middle 
East28% AsiaG/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 10 - 
 
  Chart A.6 – Comparison between notifications submitted by geographical region in the 
period 1995 -2020 and in 2021  
 
 
2.17.  The Members wh o have submitted the greatest number of notifications (regular and 
emergency) since 1995  are listed in Charts A.7 and A.8, while the Members that have submitted the 
greatest number o f notifications in 2021 are listed in Charts A.9 and A.10. In all four charts, bars 
show the number of notifications by type and values above the bars represent the corresponding 
percentage wi th respect to the total number of notifications (regular, Charts A.7 and A.9, and 
emergency, Charts  A.8 and A.10) submitted . 
Chart A.7 - Ten Members who have submitted the most regular notifications since 1995  
(percentage with respect to total of regular notifications)  
 
 
17%
10%10%
6%5%
4% 4%4% 3%3%
050010001500200025003000350040004500
United
StatesBrazil Canada European
UnionChina Peru Japan Chinese
TaipeiChile Korea,
Republic of
Regular Addenda CorrigendaG/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 11 - 
 
  Chart A.8 - Ten Members who have submitted the most emergency notifications since 
1995  (percentage with respect to total of emergency  notifications)  
 
 
Chart A.9 - Members which have submitted the most regular notifications in 2021 
(percentage with respect to total of regular notifications)  
 
 
12%
9%
7% 7%
5% 5%5%
3% 3% 3%
050100150200250300350400450
Philippines Saudi
ArabiaThailand United
Arab
EmiratesRussian
FederationAlbania New
ZealandUnited
StatesEuropean
UnionColombia
Emergency Addenda Corrigenda
15%
8%8%
6% 6%
6%
4% 4% 4%3%
050100150200250
Brazil Japan European
UnionCanada Chile United
StatesTanzania Peru China Chinese
Taipei
Regular Addenda CorrigendaG/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 12 - 
 
  Chart A.10 - Members  which have submitted the most emergency notifications in 2021 
(percentage with re spect to total of emergency notifications)  
 
 
2.18.  In 2021 (Chart A.9), Brazil submitted 15% of all regular notifications circulated. In addition, 
one LDC (Tanzania) is among the top 10 notifying Members for the second consecutive year . 
Until 31 December 2019, Tanzania had submitted a total of 29 notifications. In 2020 and 202 1, 
Tanzania submitted 72 and 6 0 notifications, respectively , suggesting that it is notifying  at a level 
above their historical trend. For emergency notifications (Chart A.10 ), nine of the top 10 notifying 
Members remain the same as in 2020 . In 2021, Thailand submitted 102 of the 268 (38%) emergency 
notifications circulated  (excluding addenda and corrigenda) . 
2.19.  When looking at the break -down  according to the type of notification, the data  show that 
some of th e top 10 notifiers submit large number s of addenda to notifications , e.g. to provide 
information on the modification of the content of a previously notified regulation . Others  submit high 
numbers of notifications but fewer follow -up ad denda. The overall data on the use of addenda are 
shown in Section 2.3.10 . 
2.2.3   Products covered  
2.20.  In accordance with paragraphs 5 and 6 of Annex B of the SPS Agreement and the 
Recommended Transparency Procedures, Members a re required to identify the products to be 
covered by a new or changed SPS measure and should provide the relevant HS codes. Most  Members 
have indicated they would welcome the provision of these codes by their trading partners.15 
However, identifying relevant HS codes is one of the main difficulties encountered by Members when 
filling in a notification according to the more recent  questionnaire on transparency.16 
2.21.  Since 1995 , the WTO's Central Registry of Notifications (CRN) has be en assigning, to the 
extent possible, the relevant HS codes for all notifications where these are not provided by 
Member s.17 The SPS NSS  facilitates the inclusion of HS (and ICS) codes by submitting Members 
through a built -in search function, providing more accurate information.  In September 2020, 
the SPS NSS (and the TBT NSS) was improved to include all HS versions available  from a drop -down 
list (see Section  4.2.1.4 ). This update was aimed at increasing accuracy in the products covered and 
facilitat ing the retrieval  of the relevant HS codes , further improving the quality of notifications . 
2.22.  While onl y indicative, Charts A.11 and A.12 show the products at the two -digit HS codes level 
that are most often covered by regular and emergency notifications since 1995. Note that only 
HS codes referred to in more than 3 % of notifications are represented and that some code 
descriptions have been  shortened for graphic reasons.  
 
15 See the Analysis of Replies to the Questionnaire on the Operation of Enquiry Points and National 
Notification Authorities, ( G/SPS/GEN/751/Rev.1 , paras. 11 and 18) for further elaboration on this point.  
16 See the Analysis of Replies to the Questionnaire on Transparency under the SPS Agreement, 
(G/SPS/GEN/1402 , para. 2.1) for further elaboration on this point.  
17 This information is available  in the SPS IMS  for tracking purposes only.  
28%
15%
11%
8%6% 6%5%3% 3%
2%
020406080100120
Thailand United
Arab
EmiratesRussian
FederationPhilippines Kuwait, the
State ofJapan Kazakhstan Saudi
ArabiaAustralia Morocco
Emergency Addenda CorrigendaG/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 13 - 
 
  Chart A.11 - HS codes most frequently assigned to regular notifications  since 1995  
 
 
Chart A.12 - HS codes most frequently assigned to emergency notifications  since 1995  
 
 
2.23.  It is interesting to note that regular notifications refer to a larger variety of HS codes in 
similarly high percentages  (10 different codes are referred to in  more than 3% of notifications, 
the highest percentage of 8% corresponding to HS  code 02 - Meat and edible meat offal). On the 
contrary , emergency notifications mainly refer to animal -related HS codes , and these represent  
higher percentages  of emergency notifications  (9 different codes are referred to in more than 3 % of 
notifications and three of these are above 30%; the highest percentages corresponding to HS code  
02 - Meat and edible meat offal , referred to in 5 0% of notifications, and to HS code 01 - Live animals , 
referred to in 49% of notifications) . These data are consistent with  results shown in Chart A.14  
related to the objective of notifications.  
2.2.4   Regions/countries affected  
2.24.  The Recommended Transparency Procedures call on Members to identify the regions or 
countries which are most likely to be affected by the measure being notified . Since December 2008, 
the notification templates  include a data entry option for this item whereby Members are invited to 
either select the checkbox for "all trading partners" or provide information on specific regions or 
countries likely to be affected.  
2.25.  Since 2008, the vast majority  of notifications affecting all trading partners are regular 
notifications and only a small percentage  are emergency notifications. Interestingly, Chart A.13  
shows a marked shift of pattern betw een 2008 to 2020 and 2021. An  assessment of notifications 
submitted in 2021 indicates that 161 regular notifications ( 16%, slightly above  the 15% in 2020) 
identified a specific group of countries or a region, while in 844 regular notifications (8 4% which 
represents 1% less than in 2020 ), the "all trading partners" checkbox was selected. In contrast, 
253 emergency notifications ( 94%, an increase of 8% with respect to 2020) identified a specific 
group of countries or a region, and only 15 emergency notifications ( 6%, less than half than last 
year) identified  "all trading partners". In other words, r egarding notifications affecting specific 
regions or countries, 59% are regu lar notifications and 41% are emergency notifications  (opposite  to 
the trend observed last year, where 45% were regular notifications and 55% were emergency 
notifications) . While the overall pattern is maintained, Chart A.13 shows a share of emergency 
notifications affecting specific regions or countries 7% higher than the average in 2008-2020.  
0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6% 7% 8% 9%
02 - Meat and edible meat offal
08 - Edible fruit and nuts; peel of citrus fruit or melons
06 - Live trees and other plants; bulbs, roots and the like; cut flowers and ornamental foliage
04 -Dairy produce; birds' eggs; natural honey; edible products of animal origin…
01 - Live animals
07 - Edible vegetables and certain roots and tubers
12 -Oil seeds and oleaginous fruits; miscellaneous grains, seeds and fruit; …
10 - Cereals
03 - Fish and crustaceans, molluscs and other aquatic invertebrates
05 - Products of animal origin, not elsewhere specified or included
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
02 - Meat and edible meat offal
01 - Live animals
04 -Dairy produce; birds' eggs; natural honey; edible products of animal origin, …
05 - Products of animal origin, not elsewhere specified or included
23 - Residues and waste from the food industries; prepared animal fodder
06 - Live trees and other plants; bulbs, roots and the like; cut flowers and ornamental foliage
16 - Preparations of meat, of fish or of crustaceans, molluscs or other aquatic invertebrates
08 - Edible fruit and nuts; peel of citrus fruit or melons
07 - Edible vegetables and certain roots and tubersG/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 14 - 
 
  2.26.  Interestingly, of the notifications submitted in 2021 affecting specific regions or countries, 
27 (17%) of the 161 regular notifi cations and 116 (46%) of the 253 emergency notifications include 
the keyword regionalization. This reflects the fact that emergency actions are frequently taken in 
response to disease or pest outbreaks in specific countries, territories, or regions. A tota l of 
111 (96%) of these 116 emergency notifications had the objective of protecting animal health. 
More detailed information on the objective of measures in relation to the affected partners is 
available in Chart A.17 . 
Char t A.13 - Percentage of regular and emergency notifications affecting all trading 
partners or specific  regions or countries  
 
 
2.2.5   Objective and rationale  
2.27.  In accordance with paragraphs 5 and 6 of Annex B of the SPS Agreement and 
the Recommended Transparency Procedures, Members are also required to state the objective and 
rationale of proposed regulations by selecting one of the following five options: food safety, animal 
health, plant protection, protect humans from animal/plant pest or disease, and protect territory 
from other damage from pests. These objectives correspond to the definition of an SPS measure in 
Annex A, paragraph 1 of the SPS Agreement.  
2.28.  Chart A.14  indicates the share of each objective as  cited in regular and emergency 
notifications. It must be noted, however, that many notifications identify more than one objective. 
Therefore, Chart A.1 4 refers to the percentage of times a specific objective was assigned regardless 
of whether the notifica tions identified multiple objectives.  
Chart A.14 - Objectives of notified SPS measures (excluding addenda and corrigenda) 
in 2021  
 
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Regular Emergency Regular Emergency
All trading
partnersSpecific regions
or countries
2008-2020 2021
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Food safety Animal health Plant protection Protect humans from
animal/plant pest or
diseaseProtect territory from
other damage from
pests
Regular EmergencyG/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 15 - 
 
  2.29.  For regular notifications , the most frequently cited objective is food safety  (65%), followed 
by plant protection  (26%) and animal health ( 13%), while for emergency notifications it is animal 
health  (90%), followed by food safety (25%) and protection of humans from animal/plant pes t or 
disease  (19%). The overall patterns have not fluctuated much  since 1995. However, 
some  differences are remarkable between 2020 and 2021: concerning regular notifications, 
a decrease of 8% in the number of notifications related to food safety  can be ob served , together 
with an increase of 7% in the number of notifications related to plant health  (Chart  A.15); regarding  
emergency notifications, a decrease of 10% in the number of notifications on protection of humans 
from animal/plant pest or disease, a 7% decrease in food safety  related notifications, and 
a 6% increase in the number of notifications on animal health  are the most striking differen ces 
(Chart A.16 ). 
Chart A. 15 - Objectives  of regular SPS measures (excluding addenda and corrigenda)  
notified in  the last five years  
 
 
Chart A. 16 - Objectives of emergency SPS measures (excluding addenda and corrigenda) 
notified in the last  five years  
 
 
2.2.6   Relationship between the objective of the measure and the regions/countries 
affected  
2.30.  Chart A.17  represent s the objectives of regular and emergency notifications in relation to 
trading partners likely to be affected (i.e., all trading partners vs specific regions/countries) , since 
2008, when revised notification formats were adopted , making these data available . 
2.31.  In the case of notifications affecting all trading partners since 20 08, food safety is the 
objective most frequently identified in regular notifications (7 7%), while plant protection  is the most 
frequent objective in emergency notifications (3 3%). In the  case of notifications likely to affect 
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Food safety Animal health Plant protection Protect humans from animal/
plant pest or diseaseProtect territory from
other damage from pests
0%20%40%60%80%100%
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Food safety Animal health Plant protection Protect humans from animal/
plant pest or diseaseProtect territory from
other damage from pestsG/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 16 - 
 
  specific regions/countries since 2008, plant protection is the objective most frequently identified in 
regular notifications ( 85%), while animal health is the most frequent objective in emergency 
notifications ( 93%). 
Chart A.17 - Objectives of regular and emergency notifications (excluding addenda and 
corrigenda)  by affected Members  since 2008  
 
 
2.2.6.1   Relationship between the objective of the measure and the development status 
of the notifying Member  
2.32.  Chart A.18  shows a  detailed analysis of the objective of the measures and the development 
status of the notifying Members . In the case of developed Members , the most striking result refers 
to plant protection measures , whic h represent 50% of the  emergency measures notified since 1995, 
followed by 27% of emergency notifications of measures to protect the territory from other damage 
from pests. Develop ing Members  submit over 93% of the emergency notifications of measures 
aiming to protect  animal health , and humans from animal/plant pest s or disease s. 
Chart A. 18 - Objectives of regular and emergency notifications (excluding addenda and 
corrigenda) by development st atus since 1995  
 
 
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Regular Emergency Regular Emergency Regular Emergency Regular Emergency Regular Emergency
Food safety Animal health Plant protection Protect humans from
animal/plant pest or
diseaseProtect territory from
other damage from pests
All trading partners Specific regions or countries
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Regular Emergency Regular Emergency Regular Emergency Regular Emergency Regular Emergency
Food safety Animal health Plant protection Protect humans from
animal/plant pest or diseaseProtect territory from
other damage from pests
Developed Members Developing Members LDCsG/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 17 - 
 
  2.2.7   International standards, guidelines or recommendations  
2.33.  The SPS Agreement does not require Members to notify a measure if its content is 
substantially the same as that of an international standard adopted by Codex, OIE or IPPC. 
Nonetheles s, the Recommended Transparency Procedures encourage Members to notify all 
regulations that are based on, conform to, or are substantially the same as an international standard, 
guideline or recommendation, if they are expected to have a significant impact  on trade of other 
Members. The notification formats also seek more precision from Members regarding relevant 
standards and the conformity of the notified measure with these.  
2.34.  Chart A.19  shows that relevant international sta ndards identified  were Codex ( 246, 
representing 25%), IPPC ( 193, representing 1 9%) and OIE ( 71, representing 7%) standards. 
This information seems consistent with  the objectives identified for regular notifications 
(Chart  A.14). Compared  to 2020, the percentage of regular notifications on food safety referring to 
a relevant international standard has decreased from 35% to 25%, while t he percentage o f those 
referring to plant protection has increased from 13% to 19%. Regarding  OIE standards, 
the percentage remained stable (8% in 2020 compared to 7% in 2021).  
Chart A.19 - Regular notifications (excluding addenda) referring to a relevant 
international standar d in 2021  
 
 
2.35.  When it comes to emergency notifications circulated in 2021, Chart A.20  shows that 
the relevant international standards referred to during in 2021  were OIE (239, 89%, higher than 
the 83% reached in the previous year)  and IPPC (16, 6%, less than the 8% observed in 2020). 
No emergency notifications referred to relevant Codex standards. This  is consistent with the 
information provided in Chart A.14 , showing that animal health is the most frequently identified 
objective in emergency notifications.  
Chart A.20 - Emergency notifications (excluding addenda) referring to a relevant 
international standard  in 2021  
 
Codex
25%
OIE
7%
IPPC
19%None
49%
Codex
0%
OIE
89%IPPC
6%None
5%G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 18 - 
 
  2.36.  It is important to keep in mind that, even if a notification refers to an international standard, 
the notified measure might not conform to it. Therefor e, in the notification formats Members are 
required to identify whether the proposed regulation conforms to the relevant international standard. 
In 2021, of the 5 1% of regular notifications identifying a relevant international standard for the 
measure, 75% indicated that the proposed regulation conformed to that relevant international 
standard. Out of the regular notifications that indicated that the notified regulation did not conform 
to a relevant international standard, all but two referred to Codex Alim entarius  standards . For the 
same period, all emergency notifications identifying a relevant international standard indicated that 
the proposed regulation conformed to the relevant international standard. This further confirms 
the relevance of the standards  set by the three international standard -setting bodies  recognized by 
the SPS Agreement  when addressing emergency situations.  
2.37.  It is interesting to note that both for regular and emergency notifications, measures notified 
by developing  Members are those that most frequently indicate conform ity with the relevant 
international standards. In the case of regular notifications ( Chart A.21 ), developing Members ' 
measures are reported to conform to international standard s in 6 3% (for Codex), 7 9% (for OIE) and 
81% (for IPPC)  of the cases . In the case of emergency notifications  (Chart A.22 ), developing 
Members' measures indicate conform ity with international standards in 74% (for Codex), 9 5% (for 
OIE) and 53% (for IPPC)  of the cases . Up to  46% of emergency notifications indicating conformity 
to a relevant international standard were notified by developed Members , which is compatible with 
results shown in Chart A.18 . 
Chart A.2 1 – Conformity of notified regular measures (excluding addenda) with 
international standards since 2008 , by development status  
 
 
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Codex OIE IPPC
Developed Members Developing Members LDCsG/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 19 - 
 
  Chart A.2 2 – Conformity of notified emergency measures (excluding addenda) with 
international standards since 2008 , by development status  
 
 
2.2.8   Proposed date of adoption/publication/entry into force  
2.38.  In accordance with paragraphs 1 and 2 of Annex B of the SPS Agreement, Members must 
ensure that all SPS regulations which have been adopted  are published promptly. Except  in urgent 
circumstances, Members are also obliged to allow a reasonable interval between the publication of 
a measure and its entry into force. Paragraph 3.2 of the Doha Decision on Implementation -Related 
Issues and Concerns  states that this interval "shall be understood to mean normally a period of not 
less than 6 months".18 
2.39.  The regular notification format contained in the Recommended Transparency Procedures 
includes separate fields for entering the "proposed date of publica tion", the "proposed date of 
adoption" and the "proposed date of entry into force". In addition, it includes a default checkbox for 
a six-month interval between the publication and entry into force of a new measure. For each of 
these items, the SPS NSS pro vides a calendar so that Members can easily enter dates, allowing for 
a more accurate analysis.  
2.40.  For 2021, about  55% of the regular notifications identified either a specific date or a wider 
period (months or quarters, mainly) for adoption  (a 5% increase re lative to 2020) , while in the 
remaining 45 %, the date of adoption was still to be determined. This illustrates that, at the time of 
notification, Members are not always able to foresee the exact date of adoption of a regulation.  
2.41.  During the reporting  period, 313 regular notifications ( 31%, 7% more than in the previous 
reporting period ) indicated a specific date of publication. Of these, 92 (29%)  had been published on 
the day, or prior to the date of distribution of the notification, and 29 (32%) of these concerned 
measures identified as trade facilitating. Regarding the interval between publication of the measure 
and its entry into force, 1 35 regular notifications ( 13%) had selected the checkbox for a six -month 
interval provided in the notific ation format. A total of 264  (26%) notifications provided a specific 
date of entry into force. Of these, only four provided a period of six months or more and , of the 
remaining , 91 provided one day or more. A total of 742 notifications ( 73%) did not specify the 
proposed date of entry into force. It  should be noted that, in some cases, such dates are not yet 
determined at the time of the notification, as the nature and extent of comments received on the 
proposed measure may affect the dates of adoption, publication and entry into force.  
2.42.  As provided for in the Recommended Transparency Procedures, notifying Members sometimes 
follow up on their original notification with an addendum to alert Members to the adoption, 
publication, or entry into fo rce of a previously notified proposed measure. About 77% of the addenda  
submitted in 2021  indicated the  adoption, publication or entry into force of regulations as shown in 
Chart A.25  (see Section 2.3.10 ). 
 
18 WT/MIN(01)/17 ; see also para. 4.3 of G/SPS/7/Rev.4 . 
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Codex OIE IPPC
Developed Members Developing Members LDCsG/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 20 - 
 
  2.2.9   Final date for comments  
2.43.  Annex B, paragraph 5 of the SPS Agreement provides that notifications should take place at 
an early stage, when amendments can still be introduced and comments  be taken into account. 
The Recommended Transparen cy Procedures state that the comment period provided for regular 
notifications should last at least 60 days. Where domestic regulatory mechanisms allow, the 60 -day 
comment period should normally begin with the circulation of the notification by the 
WTO Secretariat. The notification formats also offer a checkbox option for such a 60 -day comment 
period to encourage Members to follow this recommendation.19 The SPS NSS provides a calendar 
so that Members can easily click on the final date for comments. A total of 499 (49%) regular 
notifications  submitted in 2021 used the checkbox to provide  a 60-day comment period . 
2.44.  An analysis of the notifications issued during 2021 shows that 742 (74%) provided a comment 
period, ranging from a minimum of 1 day to a maximum of 98 days, with an average of 5 6 days 
(calculated as the difference between the date of circulation of the notification and the final date for 
comments; see Table A.2 ). More specifically, 562 regular notifications ( 56%) provided a comment 
period of 60 or more days. On average, developed Member s provided 5 7 days for comments and 
developing Members (including LDCs) 55 days.  
Table A.2. Comment peri od provided in regular notifications (20 21) 
All Members  
  No. Share  
No. of regular notifications  1,006 - 
Comment period available  742 74% 
Comment period not indicated/not available  262 26% 
Comment period ends before or equal to distribution date  2 <1% 
Average length (in days)  56 
Developed Member s 
  No. Share  
No. of regular notifications  336 - 
Comment period available  180 54% 
Comment period not indicated/not available  148 46% 
Comment period ends before or equal to distribution date  1 <1% 
Average length (in days)  57 
Developing Member s 
  No. Share  
No. of regular notifications  670 - 
Comment period available  562 84% 
Comment period not indicated/not available  107 16% 
Comment period ends before or equal to distribution date  1 <1% 
Average length (in days)  55 
 
2.45.  It should be noted that no comment period needs to be provided in the case of proposed 
measures which facilitate trade and those which are substantially the same as an international 
standard. In 2021, 271 (27%) regular notifications have been identified to be trade facilitating. 
Of these, 1 65 (61%) still provided a comment period, of which 141 (84%) provided a comment 
period  of 60 days or more . In addition,  123 (45%) of the 271  indicated  conformity with a relevant 
international standard  and, of  these,  54 (44%) still provided a comment period , which in 42 (78%) 
was of 60 days or more . It is interesting to note that most of the trade facilitating measures refer to 
food safety (Chart A.23 ).20 
 
19 See G/SPS/7/Rev.4 , para. 2.8.  
20 It must be noted that many notifications identify more than one objective . G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 21 - 
 
  Chart A. 23 – Number of trade facilitating regular measures, per objective  
 
 
2.46.  While Members must notify other WTO Members of draft, new or changed measures, they are 
not required to submit the text of the relevant regulations along with their notifications. However, 
Members have raised concerns in the SPS Committee regarding difficulties to access the full text of 
the regulations, only summarized in the notifications. Members  have also pointed out that the 
process of obtaining  the texts of regulations reduces the period actually available for providing 
comments.  
2.47.  Since February 2008, to address these concerns and facilitate access to notified draft 
regulations, Members may, on a voluntary basis, provide the Secretariat with an electronic version 
of the text of the notified draft regulation as an attachment to the notification. The  submitted text 
is then made electronically accessible to other Members through a hyperlink in  the notification 
format.21 Many Members include a hyperlink to their own electronic version of  the notified regulation 
as part of the text of the notification, in addition to or instead of the above option . The SPS NSS also 
allows Members to upload documents , that become  automatically available for all Members through 
the SPS IMS . In 2021, around 898 regular notifications ( 89%) and 202 emergency notifications 
(75%), submitted  by 58 Members, included  the full text or a summary of the notified draft 
regulations using this facility. Members may wish to remind their notification authorities of the 
availability of this facility.  
2.2.10   Addenda to regular and emergency notifications  
2.48.  Since 1995, Members have been increasing the number of addenda to regular and emergency 
notifications submitted, as shown in Chart A.24 . While  a histo rical maximum  of regular addenda was 
circulated  in 2020  (563 addenda  in total, including  502 regular and 61 emergency  addenda ), a total 
of 530 addenda have been circulated in 2021  (including 430 regular addenda and a historical 
maximum of 100 emergency addenda ) (see Chart A.1 ). 
2.49.  It is also interesting to note that an increasing number of Members are following the good 
practice of submitting addenda to regular and emergency notifications, as shown in Chart A.24 . 
In total, 70 and 49 Members have subm itted, at least once, addenda to regular and emergency 
notifications, respectively . While the overall number of Members has not changed, four and 
three  more Members have submitted addenda to regular and emergency notifications, respectively, 
in 2021 with r espect to 2020.  
 
21 See G/SPS/7/Rev.4 , para. 2.8 and Ann ex C. 
050100150200250300350400450500
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Food safety Animal health Plant protection Protect territory Protect humansG/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 22 - 
 
  Chart A. 24 - Evolution  of the number of addenda and number of Members submitting  
addenda to  regular and emergency notifications22 
 
 
2.50.  According to the Recommended Transparency Procedures, Members are asked to select  
the reason for an addendum  from a list of options. Chart A.25  shows the share of each option for 
2021. Note that the "Notification of adoption, publication, or entry into force of regulation" is a n 
option available  for addenda to regular notifications only. Also , the format for addenda to regular 
notifications include s the option " Withdrawal of proposed regulations ", while emergency notifications 
refer to "Withdrawal of regulations ". Other reasons mentioned in the f ormats include, for instance, 
lifting an import ban or the inclusion of a new country in the list of affected regions.  It is interesting 
to note that the large majority ( 77%) of addenda to regular notifications inform of the adoption, 
publication, or entry  into force of regulation while, for emergency notifications, 60% inform of the 
modification of content and/or scope of previously notified draft regulation  and almost half (4 9%) 
refer to "Other" reasons . The option "Withdrawal of regulation s", which was t icked in almost half of 
addenda to emergency notifications submitted in 2020 , was only mentioned in 28% of the addenda 
to emergency notifications in 2021.  
Chart A.25 - Reasons  for addenda (percentage)  in 202 123 
 
 
2.51.  In addition, Members can notify their decision on special and differential treatment provided 
in reference to a specific request, through another addendum notification format. As previously 
mentioned, no Member has ever notified such a decision to the Committee.  
 
22 Please note the different scales of the axis.  
23 Each notification can have multiple entries for the reasons for addenda.  
051015202530354045
0100200300400500600
Number of regular addenda Number of emergency addenda
Members submitting regular addenda Members submitting emergency addenda
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Modification of final date
for commentsNotification of adoption,
publication, or entry into
force of regulationModification of content
and/or scope of previously
notified draft regulationWithdrawal of proposed
regulationChange in proposed date
of adoption, publication, or
date of entry into force
(Regular)/
Change in period of
application of measure
(Emergency)Other
Regular EmergencyG/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 23 - 
 
  2.3  NOTIF ICATION KEYWORDS  
2.52.  In the SP S IMS, notifications can also be categorized according to a list of about 90  predefined 
keywords, which describe issues appearing frequently in notifications. The CRN has assigned these 
keywords since 2003, and they assist searching for notifications in ce rtain areas. While the keywords 
include the objectives of the notification (e.g. food safety, animal health, plant protection), they also 
include other  notification subjects, specific animal and plant diseases , etc. New keywords were added  
in 2020, including African swine fever (ASF) and COVID -19 SPS.  
2.53.  As shown in Chart A.26 , the keywords which have been most frequently assigned to regular 
notifications, in descending order for the current reporting period, a re human health, food safety, 
plant health, pesticides  and maximum residue limits ( MRLs). For emergency notifications, the most 
frequent keywords in descending order are  animal health, animal diseases, zoonoses, avian influenza 
and pest- or disease - free r egions/regionalization. It must be noted that most of  the notifications 
are assigned more than one keyword. It is interesting to note that COVID -19 SPS is only the 
20th most frequently assigned keyword (see Section 2.5 ). 
Chart A.26 - Keywords  of notified regular and emergency SPS measures in 2021 (number)  
 
 
0100200300400500600700800
Regular EmergencyG/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 24 - 
 
  2.4  COVID -19 RELATED NOTIFICATIONS AND DOCUMENTS  
2.54.  During the COVID -19 pandemic, Members have continued to fulfil their tr ansparency 
obligations , including the notification of specific COVID -19 related SPS measures. The WTO created 
the dedicated website COVID -19 and world trade  to inform of trade -related developments in light of 
the pandemic. As mentioned above, t he Secretariat created a COVID -19 SPS keyword that was 
assigned  to notifications  and other documents  based on the presence of the words COVID -19, nCOV 
or coronavirus in the text of the notifi cation. This keyword can be searched for in the SPS IMS , in the 
ePing24 and in DocsOnLine . 
2.55.  Since February 2020, Members have submitted a total of 118 documents  informing of 
measures adopted in relation to the COVID -19 pandemic . Of these, 23 notifications (includ ing 
addenda and corrigenda) and 7 communications (GEN documents  and revisions ) were submitted in 
2021 (Chart A.27 ). The GEN documents submitted include  a measure adopted by a Member, 
statements delivered by Members in the SPS Committee,  a proposal for a thematic session to be 
held in 2022 and its revision,  as well as a request by 40 Members for the suspension of the processes 
and entry into force of reductions of MRLs for plant protection products , in light of the COVID -19 
pandemic , and the corresponding reply. Only one restriction, indirectly related to the pandemic, 
was imposed in 2021. Most of the restrictions on the importation, and sometimes transit, of live 
animals and animal products, or on certain species imposed  in 2020 have already been lifted. 
Almost  two-thirds of the measures adopted facilitated trade, mainly through the acceptance of 
electronic copies or scanned certificates , and several of these measures have already been extended 
through addenda to the orig inal notifications . As of 31  December 202 1, SPS COVID -19 related 
documents represented 2 7% of all COVID -19 related documents submitted by Members to the WTO.  
The last SPS COVID -19 document was submitted on 15 December 2021 . 
 
24 A tutorial on how to create a filter for COVID -19 related SPS and TBT notifications is available here: 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ob5ou6rYYH0&feature=emb_title . Box 1. Avian influenza  
The keyword avian influenza was assigned to 157 (59%) of the 268 emergency notifications submitted in 
2021. When comparing the number of outbreaks of highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI)* notified per 
year through the OIE WAHIS system  with the SPS notifications submitted to the WTO, we observe  that the 
notification of an increased number of outbreak s to the OIE does not necessarily result in an increased  
number of measures notified  in relation to avian influenza , although in some years the trends do coincide . 
 
Despite the high number of outbreaks of HPAI notified to the OIE and the measures notified by WTO  Members 
in relation to this disease, since 1995 o nly 19 of the 532 (3.6%) STCs raised in the Committee were assigned 
the keyword avian influenza, corresponding to 15 of the 175 (8.6%) STCs relative to animal health. Members 
have also raised issues on the use of the OIE standard for HPAI under the agenda item "Monitoring of the 
use of international standards " in the SPS Committee meetings . 
Number of regular and emergency notifcations and number of new HPAI outbreaks notified to 
the OIE  
 
 
*Please note that data in the OIE WAHIS refer to HPAI while the keyword avian influenza assigned to WTO SPS 
notifications refers to both HPAI and low pathogenic avian influenza (LPAI).  
050010001500200025003000
020406080100120140160
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Regular notifications Emergency notifications New HPAI outbreaks (OIE)G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 25 - 
 
  Chart A. 27 – Objective of COVID -19 related SPS notifications and communications  from 
1 February  2020  to 31  December 2021 (number)  
 
 
2.56.  In May 2020, the Secretariat published a technical note on " Standards, regulations and 
COVID -19 - What actions taken by WTO members? " (SPS and TBT) that was updated in December 
2020. In June 2020, the SPS Committee organized an information -sharing  session on COVID -19 on 
the margins of the Committee meeting25 and, since then, it has included a dedicated item in all 
informal meetings prior to the r egular Committee meetings.26 
3  PART B - SPECIFIC TRADE CONCERNS  
3.1.  Part B of the present document contains information on STCs, maintaining the previously 
assigned numbers according to the chronological order of the Committee meetings in which they 
were first r aised, although titles may be updated to reflect the latest state of the concern. 
These  numbers serve as unique identifiers and are intended to facilitate the tracking of issues raised 
over time. The Secretariat has revised this document annually to includ e new information provided 
by Members ( G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.1  to G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.21 ). As mentioned above, i n preparing 
this document, the Secretariat has largely relied on the SPS IMS . 
3.2.  Part B  is divided into two sections:  
• General overview of specific trade concerns (1995 -2021) ; and 
• Specific trade concerns considered in 2021 . 
3.3.  The first section of Part B presents a general overview of STCs , including  summary statistics 
and graphs for all the STCs raised in the SPS  Committee between the first regular meeting of 1995 
and the last regular meeting of 20 21. It provides detailed informati on on the concerns raised per 
meeting, as well as the relation between the number of notifications and the number of concerns. 
In addition , the STCs are categorized as relating to food safety, animal or plant health, or other 
concerns. Information is also provided on the participation of Members in STCs, by development 
status, on the average number of times that STCs are raised , as well as  on reported status of 
resolution . 
3.4.  The second section of Part B contains information regarding all STCs which were raise d in the 
SPS Committee in 20 21. This includes STCs raised for the first time in 20 21, STCs which were 
previously raised and discussed again in 20 21 and STCs resolved in 2021. Information is also 
provided on  STCs for which substantive action occurred under the  Dispute Settlement Understanding 
(DSU) . All STCs discussed in 2021 are presented by responding Member.  
 
25 The report of the information -sharing session is contained in G/SPS/R/98 . 
26 The reports on the SPS Committe e informal meetings held in March, July and November 2021 are 
contained in Annex A of documents G/SPS/R/101 , G/SPS/R/102  and G/SPS/R/104 , respectively.  
0510152025
Feb-20 Mar-20 Apr-20 May-20 Jun-20 Jul-20 Aug-20 Sep-20 Oct-20 Nov-20 Dec-20 Jan-21 Feb-21 Mar-21 Apr-21 May-21 Jun-21 Jul-21 Aug-21 Sep-21 Oct-21 Nov-21 Dec-21
Restrictions Lifting of restrictions TF measures Extension of TF measures OtherG/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 26 - 
 
  3.1  General overview of specific trade concerns  (1995 -2021) 
3.5.  Altogether, 532 STCs have been raised in the 2 7 years between 1995 and the end of 20 21. 
The full list  of STCs raised since 1995 can be found in the SPS IMS . Chart B.1 shows  the number  of 
new STCs raised each year, per Committee mee ting, and Chart B.2 shows the number of new and 
previously raised STCs per year.  A total of 27 new STCs  were raised in the three SPS Committee 
meetings held in 2021. This number is higher than the average since 1995, although still lower than 
the high number of  new STCs raised in 2020 (36) , despite the fact that only two meetings were held 
in 2020.27 In 2021, 50 previously raised STCs  were discussed again, the highest numb er since 1995 
(specific information on STCs discussed in 2021 is available in Section 3.2 ). There appears to be an 
emerging upward trend in the total number of STCs discussed each year, although it is early to sa y. 
The increase coincides with the introduction of virtual/hybrid meetings since 2020  and could indicate 
that the possibility for capital -based officials to participate virtually in meetings facilitates the raising 
of STCs. Whether this trend continues wil l have to be confirmed in subsequent years.  
Chart B.1 – Number of new STCs raised since 1995, per Committee meeting  
 
 
Chart B.2 – Number of new and previously raised STCs discussed  per year since 199528 
 
 
3.6.   Chart B.3 compares new STCs raised with the number of regular and emergency notifications 
submitted per year . Although notifications have increased over time and there appears to be a recent 
upward trend in the  total number of  STCs discussed per year,  there is no clear correlation between  
 
27 The March 2020 Committee meeting was cancelled due to the COVID -19 pandemic (see document  
JOB/SPS/5/Rev.1/Corr.1 ). 
28 Please note that the number of times an STC is raised during the year is not taken into account.  
21124 23
13
102843
29
2131
1016 161322
16 1624
1421
1417 18 1736
27
March/April June/July October/November
2 1124 23
13102843
29
2131
1016 16132216 1624
14211417 18 1736
27298
10123522
27
2320
191913 181219 1916
1218
22 1523 231750
New STCs Previously raised STCsG/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 27 - 
 
  the number of notifications29 and the number of new STCs raised  in a given year30, i.e., overtime,  
an increased number of notifications does not  necessarily  translate in to a higher number of  STCs. 
Up to date, only 209 (39%) STCs discussed refer to a notification circulated by Members. 
As a specific example , while 10,005 (51%) of the regular notifications submitted since 1995 refer to 
food safety (see Section 2.3.5  in Part A), only 33% of the STCs relate to food safety  (see Chart B.4 ). 
This example reinforce s the idea that increased transparency does not  necessarily  lead to a higher 
number of concerns raised in the Committee.  
Chart B.3 - Notifications (excluding addenda and corrigenda) and new STCs raised 
since  199531 
 
 
3.7.  Chart B.4 categorizes the 532 STCs raised since 1995 into food safety, animal or plant health, 
or other concerns. Overall, 179 (34%) of STCs raised relate primarily to food safety , 175 (33%) to 
animal health and zoonoses , 119 (22%) to plant health, and 59 (11%) to other issues such as 
certification requirements, control or inspection procedures. These statistics are summarized in 
Table  B.1. 
Chart B.4 – STCs by subject (1995 -2021) 
 
 
29 See Chart A.1 . 
30 See Chart B.1 . 
31 Please note the different scales of the axis.  
05101520253035404550
02004006008001,0001,2001,4001,600
Number of STCsNumber of notifications
Regular notifications Emergency notifications New STCs
Animal health
33%Food safety
34%Other concerns
11%
Plant health
22%G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 28 - 
 
  3.8.  There does not seem to be a clear pattern in the primary subject keywords of new STCs 
submitted  since 1995 . Overall, f ood safety has been  the most frequent primary keyword of new 
STCs raised in recent  years , alternating with animal health. In general, plant  health is the less 
frequently assigned primary subject keyword of new STCs since 2000  (Chart B.5 ). 
Chart B.5 - Primary subject keywords of new STCs per year  
 
 
3.9.  Interestingly, in recent years STCs related to other concerns have considerably increased, and 
this has been the primary subject keyword assigned to almost half of the new STCs discussed in 
2021.  Specifically, t he percentage of STCs relating to other concerns has increase from 18% in 2019 
to 48% in 2021 (see  Section 3.2  and Chart B.15  below). Furthermore , since 1995, 125 (23%) of the 
532 new STCs raised by Members include "Control, inspection and approval procedures " among the 
relevant keywords, and this figure increases to 36 (45%) of the 80 new STCs raised since 2019 . 
The discussions in the Working Group on Approval Procedures, established in November 202032, 
may contribute to addressing concerns  in this context.  
3.10.  On average, STCs have been raised 2. 8 times.  Comparing the number of times that STCs 
relevant to the different primary subjects have been raised per year since 1995, those relating to 
food safety and animal health have been raised the greatest number of times , on average  
approximately  3 times. STCs relating to plant health and other concerns have been raised on average 
2.6 times.33 These statistics are summarized in Table  B.1. 
3.11.  Charts B.6 to B.9 reflect the number of issues34 raised by Members at SPS Committee 
meetings, which are then numbered under STCs , categorized by development status. As such, 
the same issue can be raised by more than one Member, in which case it is grouped under the same 
STC number. Developing Member s are participating actively under the agenda item on STCs. 
Chart  B.6 indicates that, since  1995, developing Member s have raised 360 issues, compared to 
294 issues raised by developed Member s, an d ten issues raised by least -developed Member s.35 
 
32 The Working Group on Approval Procedures was launched following a recommendation in the Fifth 
Review of the Operation and Implementation of the SPS Agreement. See documents G/SPS/64  and 
G/SPS/64/Add.1 . 
33 The Committee meeting where the STC was raised only to inform of its resolution is not taken into 
account in these calculations.  
34 One "issue" refers to the participation of one Member in an STC. As such, the participation of two 
Members in raising (or support ing) the same concern would be considered as two issues and, likewise, the 
participation of one single Member in raising (or supporting) two different trade concerns would be considered 
as two issues. Consequently, in this document the number of issues is significatively  higher than the number of 
STCs.  
35 On 1 December 2009, the Treaty of Lisbon amending the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty 
establishing the European Community  (done at Lisbon, 13 December 2007) entered into force. On  29 November 
2009, the WTO received a Verbal Note ( WT/L/779 ) from the Council of the European Union and the Commission 
of the European Communities stating that, by virtue of the Treaty of Lisbon , the European Union replaces and  
succeeds the European Community. Howev er, the European Union is referred to as the European Community 
051015202530354045
Food safety Animal health Plant health Other concernsG/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 29 - 
 
  A developing Member  has supported another Member raising an issue 508 times, compared  to 
245 times developed Member s supported an issue, and 2 3 times least -developed Member s 
supported an issue. A total of 347 issues related to measures maintained by a developing Member , 
and 2 85 to measures maintained by a developed Member . Two issues have been raised regarding 
measures maintained by a least-developed Member . Overall, the num ber of issues involving 
developing Members is much higher than those involving developed Members . 
Chart B.6 – Number of issues according to the development status of Members , since 1995  
 
 
3.12.  Specifically, when looking at the annual break -down of the number of issues raised and 
supported by Members, a difference can be observe d between developing and developed Member s, 
in particular,  in the number of developing, compared to developed , Members supporting STCs.  
Participation of developing Members has been consistently higher than that of developed Member s 
since 2008 ( Charts  B.7 and B.8). Although there may not be a direct link, a similar pattern was 
observed for regular notificati ons submitted.36 Finally, regarding the development status of Members 
responding to a new STC, we find a similar trend since 2006  (Chart B.9). 
Chart B.7 – New issues according to the development status of the Member raising the 
STC 
 
 
 
when an STC was raised or discussed before 1  December 2009. The European Union is counted as one Member. 
Similarly, when one Member speaks on behalf of ASEAN, it is counted as one Member only.  
36 See Chart A.2 . 
Members raising Members supporting Members responding294
245285360 508347
1023
2Number of Issues
Developed Members Developing Members Least-developed Members
4111821
952529
22
15 17
7106 5 5 7 8 8411
4 411
420
421114
5
52120
13
1118
5611 1418 12 11161815
111517
1935
233
111
4
0102030405060
Developed Members Developing Members Least-developed MembersG/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 30 - 
 
  Chart B.8 – New issues according to the development status of the Member supporting 
the STC  
 
 
Chart B.9 – New issues according to the development status of the Member responding to 
an STC  
 
 
3.13.  A total of 65 Members (40% of the membership) have raised at least one STC since 1995 . 
This figure has not changed since 2018.  This includes  18 developed Members  (including eight 
EU member States ), 43 developing Members  and four LDCs. A total of 78 Members have supported  
at least one STC since 1995  (13 developed  Members  -including three EU member States -, 
51 developing Members  and 14 LDCs) . A total of 7 5 Members' measures have been subject to an 
STC at least once  (24 developed  Members  -including three EU member States -, 49 developing and 
two LDCs). These numbers confirm that developing Members and LDCs are very active in the 
SPS Committee.  
3.14.  Charts  B.10 and B.11 show the ten Members that have raised the highest number of  new 
concerns and the ten Members that have the highest number of measures subject to an STC, 
respectively, since 1995 up to the last Committee meeting in November 20 21. Out of the 
10 Members that have raised the highest number of STCs since 1995, three are developed Members 
and the remaining seven are developing Members . When it comes to Members responding to STCs, 
four are developed and six are developing  Members . Chart B.10  shows that,  in some cases, 
1 4 619
471428
152115
4 1810 81594 36 414
617
3182424
210251839 29
22
22
2871722
10
832
7
733244647
1111
212
151
010203040506070
Developed Members Developing Members Least-developed Members
29
1519
5 531
1521
1318
5 49512
7 712
74 368 810
429
105
13
510
29132513
61310149
9 916
718
111610 927
1611
05101520253035404550
Developed Members Developing Members Least-developed MembersG/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 31 - 
 
  more than 80% of the STCs raised have been resolved or partially resolved . Of the total  number of 
STCs raised by these top 10 Members, 207 (51%) are either resolved or partially resolved. In the 
case of the seven developing Members , this corresponds to 87 (42%) of the STCs raised .37 
Chart B.10 - Members wh o have raised the most STCs since 19 95 
 
 
Chart B.11 - Members responding  to the most STC s since 1995  
 
 
3.15.  Chart B. 12 shows that South America, Central America and the Caribbean is the region that 
has raised more STCs since 1995, followed by North America. Asia is the region responding to a 
higher number of STCs, followed by Europe. Finally, South America, Central Americ a and the 
Caribbean is also the region that most frequently support s STCs.  Although Asia also seems to be the 
region that has submitted  the highest number of notifications  (see Chart A.5 ) since 1995 , there 
seems t o be no  clear correlation between the number of notifications submitted and the number of 
STCs raised or supported nor the measures maintained subject to an STC.  
 
37 Members can report on the resolution of STCs under the corresponding agenda item in the 
SPS Committee . Where an STC  has been raised by more than one Member but not all those who raised the STC 
have reported  it to be resolved, the STC is considered to be partially resolved. Also, for partially resolved STCs, 
for the concern may have been resolved for  selected products o r by some of the importing Members main taining 
the measure in question.  
020406080100
United
StatesEuropean
UnionBrazil Argentina China India Canada Colombia Ecuador Mexico
Not reported Partially resolved Resolved
020406080100120
European
UnionUnited
StatesChina Japan Australia India Brazil Russian
FederationKorea,
Republic ofMexico Indonesia
Not reported Partially resolved ResolvedG/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 32 - 
 
  Chart B. 12 – STCs by geographical region since 1995  
 
 
3.16.  Chart B .13 shows the number of times STCs have been raised since 1995.38 A total of 
340 (64%) have only been raised one or two times, 1 35 (25%) ha ve been raised three to five times 
and only 5 7 (11%) have been raise d more than five times. Of the 2 61 STCs for which no solution 
has been reported, 1 56 (61%) have only been raised once (excluding the seven  raised for the first 
time at the November 2021  Committee meeting ). Some of these STCs may have been resolved 
without t he Committee being informed.  
Chart B.1 3 - Average number of times STCs have been raised since 1995  
 
 
3.17.  Chart B.14  shows that out of the 532 STCs raised since 1995, 197 (37%) and 74 (14%) have 
been reported to be resolved and partially resolved, respectively. In the case of the partially resolved 
STCs, the concern may have been resolved  for selected products or by some of the importing 
Members maintaining the measure(s) in question. No s olutions have been reported for the remaining 
261 (49%) STCs. Thus, more than 50% of the STCs raised have been resolved  or partially resolved . 
Specifically, 44% of STCs raised by developing Members are considered to be resolved or partially 
resolved . These  data confirm the importance of the Committee for the resolution of  trade concerns.  
 
38 These figures do not include the time the STC was raised in the Committee to report on its resolution.  
020406080100120140160180200
Raising Supporting Responding
Asia Europe SA, CA & Caribbean North America Africa CIS Middle East
11% , raised 
>5 times
25% , raised 
3-5 times64%, raised 
1-2 timesG/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 33 - 
 
  Chart B.14 – Resolution of STCs  
 
 
3.18.  On average, resolved STCs were raised 2. 4 times. Of the 197 STCs for which a solution has 
been reported, 82 (42%) relate to animal health, 5 7 (29%) to plant health, 47 (24%) to food safety, 
and 11 (5%) to other concerns. It is interesting to note that STCs  relating to plant health issues 
represent 2 2% of the total number of STCs raised since 1995 ( Chart B.4), while they correspond to 
29% of the STCs reported as resolved. On the contrary, while STCs relate  to food safety and a nimal 
health in similar proportion (3 3% in both cases ), STCs relating to animal health represent almost 
double ( 42%) of the STCs reported as resolved compared to those relating to food safety ( 24%). 
STCs relating to other concerns represent 11% of the tota l, and 5% of the STCs reported as resolved. 
These statistics are summarized in Table B.1. 
Table B.1 - Summary of statistics on resolution of STCs , by primary subject keyword  
Primary keyword 
subject  Food safety  Animal health  Plant health  Other concerns  All STCs  
All STCs  179 (34%) 175 (33%) 119 (22%) 59 (11%) 532 
Number of times 
raised (average)  3 2.9 2.6 2.6 2.8 
STCs reported as 
resolved (R)  47 (24%) 82 (42%) 57 (29%) 11 (5%) 197 (37%) 
Number of times R 
STCs have been 
raised  2.8 2.1 2.4 2.7 2.4 
Partially resolved 
(PR) STCs  24 (32%) 30 (41%) 16 (22%) 4 (5%) 74 (14%) 
Number of times PR 
STCs have been 
raised  2.8 4.8 3.5 3.2 3.8 
STCs for which no 
solution has been 
reported (NR)  108 (41%) 63 (24%) 46 (18%) 44 (17%) 261 (49%) 
Number of times NR 
STCs have been 
raised  3.1 3.1 2.6 2.4 2.9 
 
3.2  Specific trade concerns considered in 2021 
3.19.  A total of 64 STCs were brought to the attention of the Committee during 20 21, of which 
27 were new STCs and 50 had been raised previously (Table B.2 ). Thirteen  STCs raised for the first 
time in 2021 were again discussed in subsequent meetings during the same year. In 2021, one STC 
was considered as resolved and another  as partially resolved  (see Section 3.2.1  below) . Substantive  
action occurred under the DSU in t he case of five STCs ( N° 185, N° 369, N° 394, N° 432 and N°  495) 
(Table B. 3). 
261 (49%), no 
solution reported
197 (37%), 
solution reported74 (14%), partial 
solution reportedG/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 34 - 
 
  3.20.  Fewer new STCs were raised in 2021 than in 2020, despite the fact that only two meetings 
were held that year (Chart B.1 ).39 The number of new STCs raised in 2021 was the second  highest  
after 2020,  in any given  year since 2003, and the third highest since 1995. On the other hand , the 
50 STCs previously raised discussed  again  in 2021 represent a historical maximum  (Chart B.2 ). 
Thirty -seven (74%) of these 50 STCs were raised for the first time less than three years ago, while 
only 13 have been  discussed for longer. Half of these 50 STCs have been discussed less than 4 times 
since they were raised. One of these STCs, considered to be partially resolved  (see Section 3.2.1 ), 
has been raised 43 times.  
3.21.  Despite the high number of notifications  circulated every year  (Chart A.1 ), only four of the 
27 new STCs raised in 202 1 referred  specifically  to SPS notifications  submitted  in 2020 or in 2 021. 
For instance , despite the high number of COVID -19 related SPS notifications  and documents 
submitted since the beginning of the  pandemic  (Chart A.27 ), only four new COVID -19 related STCs 
have been raised in 2020 and 2021.40 
3.22.  Despite the mostly virtual or hybrid character of the 2021 meetings and the fact that delegates 
were not gathering in Geneva, several STCs were removed either  before the adoption of the agenda 
or during  the Committee meetings  due to progress in bilateral consultations . In particular, in 
March  2021 Viet Nam withdrew an STC regarding Brazil's regulation on the use of phosphates for 
fishery prod ucts, product registration before export and heat treatment regime for cooked shrimps, 
due to progress in bilateral consultations. Similarly, Brazil withdrew its STCs regarding Viet Nam's 
restrictions on live cattle and Viet Nam's restrictions on melon.41 In November 2021 , before 
the adoption of the agenda China  withdrew a  new STC regarding Japan's pesticide maximum residue 
limits for honey , and Japan withdrew a previously raised STC on Thailand's phytosanitary restrictions 
on imports of fresh citrus fruit s due to sweet orange scab . Similarly, Guatemala withdrew STCs 474 
and 475 on the modification of EU MRLs for plant protection products on chlorpyrifos and 
chlorpyrifos -methyl, and mancozeb, respectively, and merged its intervention under STC 448 .42 
3.23.  As mentioned earlier, a total of 64 (new and previously raised)  STCs were discussed in 2021. 
Table B.2  provides further information on Members' participation in these STCs, i.e. the Members 
raising, supporting or responding to concerns. In 2021, 25 Members (15%  of the membership ) 
raised at least one STC, including 14 Members that raised  at least one new ST C and 23 that raised  
at least one previously raised STC. Of these, five (20%) are developed Member s and the remaining 
20 (80%) are developing Members , suggesting that these Members value  the Committee as a forum 
to discuss trade concerns. Three  previously raised STCs, discussed  four, nine and 21 times, 
have gathered the support of ten  Members or more.43 Concerning Members responding, the 27 new 
STCs were raised against measures maintained by 14 Members ( one developed and 13 developing 
Members ). The 50 previ ously discussed STCs were raised against measures maintained by 
18 Members, including two developed and 16 developing Members . Additionally, one STC was raised 
again against measures maintained by 19 Members.  
3.24.  Out of the 27 new STCs raised in 20 21, eight (30%) relate primarily to food safety. 
Three  (11%) others relate primarily to animal health  and zoonoses44, noting that  this category 
includes issues that are also relevant from a food safety perspective. Three (11%) other STCs relat e 
to plant health , and the highest number of STCs, 13 (48%), refer to other concerns . 
Chart  B.15 shows all new and previous STCs raised in the Committee in 20 21 compared to all STCs 
discussed between 1995 and 20 20, by prim ary subject keywords assigned.  These data show a  sharp  
increase in the percentage  of new STCs related to other concerns , which increased from 36% in 2019 
to 44% in 2020  and 48% in 2021 . While the percentage of new and previously raised STCs relating 
to food safety discussed in 2021 is similar to the average until the end of 2021, the percentage of 
 
39 The March 2020 Committee meeting was cancelled due to the COVID -19 pandemic (see document  
JOB/SPS/5/Rev.1/Corr.1 ). 
40 These STCs were 487 and 488, raised in 2020, and 506 and 507, raised in 2021.  
41 See paragraph 3.1 in document G/SPS/R/101 . These three STCs had been included in the annotated 
draft agenda circulated as JOB/SPS/13 . 
42 See paragraph 3.1 in document G/SPS/R/104 . These STCs had been included in the annotated draft 
agenda circulated as JOB/SPS/17 . 
43 STCs 501, 448 and 382 respectively.  
44 Among the new STCs raised in 2021, one refers to acute hepatopancreatic necrosis disease (AHPND) 
(507), and two refer to foot and mouth disease ( 510 and 522). These three STCs were f irst raised and 
subsequently discussed in 2021. Additionally, other previously raised STCs related to ASF ( 392, 393 and 466), 
BSE ( 193), avian influenza  (406, 431 and 456) and foot and mouth disease (489). G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 35 - 
 
  STCs related to animal and plant health discussed in 2021  is considerably lower compared to all 
STCs discussed between 1995 and 2020 . 
Chart B.15 – New an d previous STCs raised in 2021 , by primary subject keywords, 
compared to all STCs raised between 1995 and 20 20 (percentage)  
 
 
3.25.  Taking  a closer look at the new "Other concerns"  raised in 202 1, two developed Members  
have raised such concerns, compared to seven  developing Members . The measures  raised  were 
maintained by one developed Member , seven developing Members  and one LDC.  The keyword s 
"Control, inspection and approval proced ures" was assigned to  12 (92%) of the STCs, and " Undue 
delays " and "Risk assessment" each applied  to nine (69%) of the 1 3 STCs.  A more detailed analysis 
of the 1 7 previously raised STCs related to other concerns shows that these were also raised by 
five developed Members  and seven  developing Members  on measures maintained by two developed 
Members  and nine developing Members . The keywords most frequently assigned to these STC s were 
"Control, inspection and approval procedures " (15 STCs, 88% ), undue delays (5 STCs, 93%) and 
risk assessment ( 14 STCs, 82 %). 
3.2.1   Resolution of STCs in 202 1 
3.26.  In July 2021, the European Union informed the Committee that STC 193 was considered as 
resolved for the following Members: the Philippines; the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia; Singapore; 
Turkey; and Ukraine. This STC has been raised 43 times. In November 2021, Mexico informed the 
Committee of the resolution of STC 515 , related to Panama's authorization of Federal Inspection 
Type establishments. This STC has been raised three  times. Table B.2  indicates the STCs reported 
as resolved  or partially resolved  in 202 1.45 
4  PART C – OTHER TRANSPARENCY -RELATED ASPECTS  
4.1  Transparency recommendations in the  Fifth Review  
4.1.  The Report of the Fifth Review on the Operation and Implementation of the SPS Agreement46 
was adopted at the June 2020 Committee meeting. The Report contains the following 
recommendation on Notification Procedures and Transparency (paragraph 7.13):  
a. Members are encouraged to clearly indicate in their SPS Committee notifications when 
a measure has been notifie d to another Committee.47 Members should include this 
 
45 As per footnote 37, where an STC has been raised by more than one Member but not all those who 
raised the STC have reported  it to be resolved, the STC is considered to be p artially resolved. Also, in partially 
resolved STCs, trade may have been allowed for selected products or by some of the importing Members 
maintaining the measure in question.  
46 G/SPS/64  and G/SPS/64/Add.1 . 
47 Please refer to section 2.7 of the Recommended Procedures for Implementing the Transparency 
Obligations of the SPS Agreement (Article 7) in document G/SPS/7/Rev.4 , which also makes reference to 
notifying a regulation containing SPS and TBT measures under both the SPS and TBT Agreements.  
0%5%10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%50%
Food safety Animal health Plant health Other concerns
Total new STCs 1995-2020 2021 (New STCs) 2021 (Previously raised STCs)G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 36 - 
 
  information under the point of the notification format titled "Other relevant documents 
and language(s) in which these are available".  
4.2.  The Report also contains the following recommendations on National SPS Coordination 
Mechanisms (paragraph 6.7):  
a. Members are encouraged to implement appropriate national coordination mechanisms 
to enable consultation and communication between relevant technical and trade policy 
experts to enable  the development of coordinated SPS positions that are consistent with 
the obligations of the SPS Agreement. Members are further encouraged to consider 
ways to strengthen internal coordination on SPS matters.  
b. Members should continue to share experiences o n their national coordination 
mechanisms and discuss strategies and approaches to improve SPS coordination and 
engagement at the national level with the aim of strengthening implementation of the 
SPS Agreement, including resolving specific trade concerns.  
c. The Committee requests the Secretariat to prepare a collection of resources that can be 
useful for Members in implementing their national coordination mechanisms, starting 
with those mentioned at the 2019 Workshop on Transparency and Coordination, and 
including additional resources as suggested by Members.  
4.3.  Following the recommendation in paragraph 6.7 c), the Secretariat circulated in October 2020 
a compilation document  for Members' comments . A first revision of the document, incorporating 
Member's comments , was circulated in February 2021 and presented in the March 2021 Committee 
meeting.48 
4.2  Improvement of SPS IT tools  and materials  
4.4.  This section presents various  SPS IT tools and transparency -related resources. In light of the 
steadily increasing volume of do cuments, managing the flow of notifications, and coordinating at the 
national level on SPS matters  is a challenge for many Members. This is one of the areas where 
Members have sought technical assistance and guidance on best practices.49 
4.5.  The WTO Secretaria t regularly provides hands -on training on all its tools , as part of its technical 
assistance programmes.50 According to the 2015 questionnaire on transparency, the majority of 
respondents  expressed a need for technical assistance to enhance their transpare ncy mechanisms, 
and Members that received such technical assistance reported it to be very useful.51 Some Members 
significantly increase their notification activity following a dedicated training on transparency. 
Similarly, some Members have updated the contact details of their NNAs and NEPs available in the 
SPS IMS and ePing, further facilitating communication between Members.  
4.6.  Additionally, t ransparency workshops, usually organized every other year, have provided highly 
interactive training on the use of the SPS IMS, SPS NSS and ePing. Likewise , these dedicated 
trainings have also led to an increased use of these tools. The last Workshop focusing exclusively on 
transparency was held in Geneva on 30 and 31  October 2 017.52 Within the framework of the 
Fifth Review, a Workshop on Transparency and Coordination took place on 15 and 16 July 2019, 
in the margins of the SPS  Committee meeting.53 All the information from previous workshops and 
thematic sessions on transparency  is available in the revamped  Members' transparency toolkit  on 
 
48 The document was circulated as G/SPS/GEN/1850 , subsequently  revised ( G/SPS/GEN/1850/Rev.1 ). 
49 See the Analysis of Replies to the Questionnaire on the Operation of Enquiry Points and National 
Notification Authorities ( G/SPS/GEN/751/Rev.1 ) for further elaboration on this issue.  
50 See the latest version of the G/SPS/GEN/521  document series.  
51 See the Analysis of Replies to the Questionnaire on Transparency under the SPS Agreement,  
(G/SPS/GEN/1402 , paras. 3.29 and 3.30) for further elaboration on this  point.  
52 Information on this Workshop is available in 
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/sps_e/wkshopttranparency_oct17_e.htm . The report is contained in 
document G/SPS/R/89 . 
53 The programme of the W orkshop is contained in G/SPS/GEN/1694/Rev.2 . A report of the Workshop 
can be found in G/SPS/R/96 . G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 37 - 
 
  the SPS gateway.  At the November 2021 Committee meeting, Members agreed to hold the next 
workshop on transp arency in June 2022.54 
4.2.1   Integration of SPS and TBT IT tools  – the new ePing SPS&TBT Platform  
4.7.  The Secretariat is currently undertaking a project to integrate all SPS and TBT tools  into a 
single platform, to allow for cross-cutting search es. The new  platform  will allow  access  to the 
different functions (submission  of notifications , search ing notifications and STCs , creating report s, 
etc.), depending on differentiated users' rights . This will allow the extraction of data from a single 
source, reducing errors and maintenance costs. Additionally, the WTO Secretariat is working towards 
the creation of a single sign -on system  that will give access to all WTO databases  to which a user 
has rights with a single pair of credentials. The following paragraphs sum marize the functions that 
will be integrated in the new ePing SPS&TBT  Platform .55 In the SPS and TBT Committees, 
Members  have been regularly informed of progress made in the implementation of this project.  
4.2.1.2   Searches  
4.2.1.2.1   Notifications and STCs  
4.8.  The new platform will integrate and improve the search functions for notifications and STCs 
currently available in the SPS IMS.  Likewise, contact details o f NNAs and NEPs, currently available 
in the SPS IMS and ePing , will also be available in the new plat form.  
4.9.  Users will be able to search for SPS and TBT notifications together, as well as to perform more 
specific searches based on the information contained in the notification templates of each domain. 
Since notifications are increasingly being submitted online ( see Section 4.2.1.4 ), the information 
available will be  more complete and harmonized, further improving the quality  of searches. Members 
will be able to register to the platform to have access to advanced functions,  such as saving filters, 
defining favourite documents , or access ing chats previously available in  the ePing  alert system . 
4.10.  Concerning searches on STCs, the integrated platform will mirror the data available in the 
WTO Trade Concerns Database (TCD) , available to Members in beta version since February 2021 .56 
This advanced  analytical tool for STCs integrates concerns raised in the SPS and TBT Committees , 
as well as in the Committ ee on Market Access. It may incorporate concerns raised in other 
WTO bodies in the future . The mirroring  of the  TCD in the new integrated platform  allows for data 
to be extracted from a single source, ensuring consistency and reducing maintenance costs and 
errors. For more advanced searches, the new platform will redirect users to the TDC, which contains 
more granular information, organized on a per  meeting basis, facilitating in-depth  analysis and 
reporting. The database includes  Member profiles and allows users to explore and visualize results 
by objectives, keywords, and HS codes, among other options. This analytical tool is fed from the 
data avai lable in eAgenda  and has been manually completed with historical data on trade concerns 
available in the summary reports of the Committee meetings, currently  searchable through the 
SPS IMS. 
4.11.  The new integrated platform also inclu des the possibility to search both notifications and STCs 
at the same time. At a future stage, users will also have the possibility to search for other 
SPS documents, which are currently searchable through the SPS IMS.  
4.2.1.3   ePing a lert system  
4.12.  The functions curr ently available in the ePing alert system  will be integrated and enhanced in 
the new ePing SPS&TBT Platform. As such, the new platform will include a publicly available alert 
system for SPS  and TBT  notification s. By filling a registration form, users will be able to indicate 
particular products and/or markets of interest to them, and can subscribe to receive email alerts 
 
54 See paragraph 4.1 8 in document G/SPS/R/104 . 
55 Currently, the Practical Manual for NNAs and NEPs , first circulated in 2011  and revised in 2018, offers 
guidance for governments to facilitate the implementation of the transparency provisions of the 
SPS Agreement . The Secretariat prepared an overview of the transparency tools . These materials will be 
reviewed in light of the on -going development on IT tools.  
56 The WTO TCD was launched in beta version in the margins of the February 2021 TBT Committee 
meeting and presente d to the SPS Committee at its March 2021 meeting.  G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 38 - 
 
  regarding SPS and TBT notifications. In addition, users will continue to be able to share notifi cations, 
upload additional information and related documents, as well as participate in discussion forums. 
An enquiry point management tool will continue to be available to facilitate domestic as well as 
international information sharing and discussion  on notifications . Users with admin rights will also 
have access to a chat function to discuss topics of their choice, whether related to  a specific  
notification  or not . As such, the system will continue to help public and private stakeholders, 
in particular small and medium enterprises, to track, consult and comment on measures that are 
being developed and adapt as necessary to changing regulatory conditions.  
4.13.  In 2021, the Secretariat undertook a survey to get better insights on the use of the ePing  alert 
system , and how it can be improved. The results of the survey reflect an overall user satisfaction as 
well as some concrete suggestions for further improvements. Overall, users appreciate receiving 
daily or weekly alerts. Several responses indicated  the development of an ePing app as the main 
enhancement that would further improve ePing services. More information is available in document  
G/SPS/GEN/1933 ; G/TBT/GEN/317 . A new app is currently under development, that would allow 
users to access some of the functionalities of the Platform.  
4.14.  As of 31 December 202 1, the number of subscribers had grown  to 15,443  (including 
6,204  users from private sector) from 184 countries, up from 12,360 users (including 4,932 users 
from the private sector) from 182 countries at the end of 2020. Some of these users registered afte r 
a TA activity had been delivered in their country or their region, confirming the efficiency of 
TA activities to spread the word about  ePing and get users started with the registration process and 
the subscription to receive email alerts. 82% of users re ceive daily or weekly email alerts of SPS  and 
TBT notifications. Some  additional functionalities, such as the national and international discussion 
fora and the chat for users with admin rights, are also of interest to many Members. In total, 
there  are 2 74 ePing admin users registered on ePing, covering 1 13 countries and territories. 
In the case of SPS, a  total of 139  admin user s from 76 countries are  registered.  
4.15.  During the COVID -19 pandemic, the keywords COVID -19 SPS and COVID -19 TBT were 
created and assi gned to relevant notifications, and ePing users can search for these notifications and 
also receive alerts by email.57 
4.2.1.4   Online s ubmission of notifications  
4.16.  Currently, Members can easily and accurately complete and submit all SPS notification  
format s online u sing the Notification Submission System ( SPS NSS ). This will now be one of the 
functions accessible through the integrated platform , and SPS NSS will be discontinued . 
Through  online submission, Members can be more precise in their notifications, which can then be 
processed more quickly , making documents accessible to the membership faster . The SPS NS S was 
improved in 2017, and again in 2020 to include all versions of the Harmonized System (HS). 
The submission of notifications through the new platform will provide the same functions as the 
SPS NSS, with improved and streamlined processes.  Increased online submission  helps improv ing 
the amount and the quality of information provided by Members in the v arious notification formats, 
as well as the accuracy of the information available for searches . Interested  Members may request 
login names and access passwords for their NNAs, as well as personali zed training  on the SPS NSS , 
from the Secretariat . Since the  credentials currently provided to Members are generic (one set of 
credentials per Member)58, new individual credentials will have to be generated upon the launch of 
the new platform.  An audio -visual  guide  explaining the use of the NSS is available for Members  
(in English) . New materials will be developed in due course.  
4.17.  Since its creation, t he use of the SPS NSS  has constantly increas ed. This system has also 
been included in numerous virtual training activities on transparency delivered in 2021, contributing 
to improve national coordination in some Members.59 Similarly, some regional grouping s are 
currently submitting joint notifications through the SPS NSS, a nd several regions are exploring the 
possibility of doing so . To date, 100 Members have received credentials  to access the SPS NSS, and 
 
57 A tutorial on how to create a filter for COVID -19 related SPS and TBT notifications is available here: 
https://www.youtube.com /watch?v=Ob5ou6rYYH0&feature=emb_title . 
58 Currently, two different usernames and passwords are provided (a submitting  username and a 
secondary  username). Only the submitting username allows to officially submit the notification to the CRN, but 
the secondary username allows other individuals to enter information and review the draft notification.  
59 See the latest version of the G/SPS/GEN/521  document series.  G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 39 - 
 
  65 of these ha ve officially submitted notifications through the system. Following the Secretariat 's 
initiative to promote the use of the SPS NSS among the most frequent notifiers , in 2021 two 
additional Members have started using the SPS NSS to submit their notification s. In 2021, about 
90% of notifications  (6% more than in 2020) , by 48 Members,  were submitted via the SPS NSS . 
Since 2017, the  percentage of SPS notifications submitted through the online platform has risen 
from 45% in 2017 to 90% in 202 1 (Chart C.1 ). 
Chart C.1 – Percentage of notifications submitted via the SPS NSS since 2017 , and number 
of Members using the system per year60 
 
 
4.2.1.5   Facts and Figures  
4.18.  In this tab  of the new ePing SPS&TBT Platform , users will have the option to visualize more 
detailed analysis. An overview of Members profiles will include  the NNA and NEPs contact details, 
and a graphical visualisation of the Member's notification activity , including details on HS codes 
associated w ith SPS notifications . Likewise, information of a Member's involvement in STCs will also 
be available , extracting the data from the TCD. Users will also have the option to view more detailed 
analysis on notifications and STCs.  
4.2.2   eAgenda  
4.19.  The eAgenda is a coll aborative online platform developed by the WTO to support the work of 
the SPS , TBT and Market Access Committees . This platform allows Members, ahead of a meeting, to 
insert interventions under any item in the proposed agenda, including to raise and support  STCs. 
Members  can also upload statements that are shared with all users in real time, significantly 
contributing to increas ed transparency prior to the meeting.  While it will remain a stand -alone 
platform, eAgenda users will be able to reach the system from the new ePing SPS&TBT P latform 
without having to log in again.  
4.20.  The SPS eAgenda was pilot -tested in February 2020 by nine Members and actively used for 
the fir st time during the June 2020 SPS Committee meeting . Since November 2020, t he SPS eAgenda 
platform is regularly used by most Members to add agenda items, raise STCs and upload  statements . 
In November 2021, most agenda items and STCs raised were included dir ectly by Members 
in eAgenda, increasing transparency ahead of the meeting and leading to efficiency gains in the 
preparation of the annotated draft agenda by the Secretariat.  
4.21.  Since March 2021 , Members have the possibility to support STCs and other agenda i tems 
through eAgenda until they are discussed in the formal meeting, provided that these STCs and 
agenda items were already raised by another Member before the deadline established . As per the 
usual procedure, Members are also able to support items orally during the Committee meeting. 
Members can add other items to the agenda (apart from STCs and items under monitoring of the 
 
60 For comparison, Chart A.1  shows the number of Members who have submitted at  least one 
notification in a given year.  
3439433948
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.1 4 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.2 2 
 
- 40 - 
 
  use of international standards) at the beginning of the formal meeting, before adoption of the 
agenda. Only Members who take the floo r during the meeting are reflected in eAgenda and their 
oral statements recorded in the summary report  of the meeting . Most Members uploaded a detailed 
statement relative to the oral interventions made in SPS Committee meeting s. 
4.22.  As of 31 December 202 1, more than 300  users from 7 7 Members we re registered in 
SPS eAgenda, of  which 118 (39%) had reading rights only, allowing them to consult the proposed 
agenda for the meeting without being able to raise items nor upload statements.  In 202 1, 
the Secretariat included eAgenda in several technical assistance activities and  remains available to 
provide additional training upon request.  
4.3  Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF)  
4.23.  In November 2021, the STDF launc hed a new practical guide on the use of Good Regulatory 
Practices (GRPs)61 to strengthen and improve the design, development and review of SPS measures. 
The guide i ncludes a focus on transparency, which is a cross -cutting principle of GRPs and relevant 
throughout the regulatory lifecycle of SPS measures. It is embodied in various GRPs, such as 
stakeholder engagement (e.g., consultations), information dissemination, o r cooperation and 
coordination mechanisms. The guide also provides an overview of the transparency tools available 
to help with consultations, information dissemination, publication, notifications, etc. WTO Members 
are encouraged to consult and use the new  STDF guide in efforts to enhance the effectiveness, 
efficiency, coherence and overall fitness -for-purpose of their SPS measures.  
4.24.  As part of its work on Trade Facilitation , the STDF has identified a number of experiences, 
lessons and good practices to improve the implementation of SPS controls in a way that facilitates 
safe trade, while minimizing transaction costs. The work underlined the importance of transparency 
on SPS measures. F or example, improving clarity on control, inspection and approval procedures is 
a simple step that can produce big benefits. If producers and traders are to implement 
SPS measures, they need to understand what they are. Publication of SPS regulations, form s and 
fees (preferably online) will open up markets and support good governance. The work also 
highlighted the importance of regular public -private dialogue so that businesses (including MSMEs) 
know what is required of them, including when SPS regulations or procedures change.  
4.25.  STDF's P-IMA framework  is also relevant and offers an evidence -based approach to inform 
and improve SPS planning and decision -making pr ocesses and link SPS investments to public policy 
goals such as export growth, agricultural productivity or poverty reduction. In this process, 
P-IMA encourages public -private dialogue, boosts transparency and accountability, and improves 
the economic effi ciency of investment decisions. Other projects developed and financed by the 
STDF62 have also resulted led in increased transparency levels by promoting inter -agency 
coordination at the national and/or regional level, and by strengthening linkages between 
government agencies and the private sector.  
4.26.  Delegates are invited to contact the ST DF Secretariat ( stdfsecretariat@wto.org ) to obtain 
further information on the work carried out by the Facility.  
 
 
61 French and Spanish versions, a nd a short STDF Briefing Note on GRPs, will be come  available sh ortly. 
62 Examples are available here: https://www.standardsfacility.org/projectgrants .  
  G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.14 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.22  
 
- 41 - Table B.2 – STCs (new or previously raised ) discussed and resolved in the SPS Committee  in 2021, organized in alphabetical order  of Members 
responding to the concern63 
The table below contains all the STCs, new and previously raised, that were discussed in 2021, organized alphabetically by re sponding Member. The full list of 
new STCs raised in 2021 can be accessed here. The full list of previously raised STCs raised again in 2021 can be accessed here. 
Member 
responding  STC 
ID In 2021  Title Member(s) raising  Member(s) 
supporting  Primary 
subject 
keyword  First raised 
(subsequently 
raised)  Status  
Argentina  193 Subsequently 
raised  General import restrictions 
due to BSE  European Union; 
United States of 
America  Canada; Switzerland; 
Uruguay  Animal health  01/06/2004  
(42 times)  PR* 
Australia  193 Subsequently 
raised  General import restrictions 
due to BSE  European Union; 
United States of 
America  Canada; Switzerland; 
Uruguay  Animal health  01/06/2004  
(42 times)  PR* 
Bolivia  530 New Bolivia's import restrictions 
on agricultural and livestock 
products  Peru  Plant health  03/11/2021  
(0 times)  NR 
Brazil  193 Subsequently 
raised  General import restrictions 
due to BSE  European Union; 
United States of 
America  Canada; Switzerland; 
Uruguay  Animal health  01/06/2004  
(42 times)  PR* 
China  193 Subsequently 
raised  General import restrictions 
due to BSE  European Union; 
United States of 
America  Canada; Switzerland; 
Uruguay  Animal health  01/06/2004  
(42 times)  PR* 
China  392 Subsequently 
raised  China's import restrictions 
due to African swine fever  European Union   Animal health  15/07/2015  
(12 times)  NR 
China  406 Subsequently 
raised  China's import restrictions 
due to highly pathogenic 
avian influenza  European Union; 
United States of 
America   Animal health  16/03/2016  
(14 times)  NR 
China  485 Subsequently 
raised  China's administrative 
measures for registration of 
overseas manufacturers of 
imported food 
(26 November 2019)  Australia; Canada; 
European Union; 
Japan; United States of 
America  Korea, Republic of; 
Philippines; Switzerland; 
Thailand; 
United  Kingdom  Other concerns  24/06/2020  
(4 times)  NR 
China  487 Subsequently 
raised  China's actions related to 
COVID -19 that affect trade 
in food and agricultural 
products  Australia; Canada; 
European Union; India; 
Russian Federation; 
United States of 
America  Brazil; Japan; Kenya; 
Mexico; New Zealand; 
Paraguay; Switzerland; 
United Kingdom  Food safety  05/11/2020  
(3 times)  NR 
China  506 New (subsequently 
raised in 2021)  China's proposed new health 
certificate format for shrimp 
imports  India  Other concerns  25/03/2021  
(1 time)  NR 
China  510 New (subsequently 
raised in 2021)  China's restrictions on 
bovine meat imports  India  Animal health  25/03/2021  
(1 time)  NR 
 
63 Please note that a hyperlink in the ID number redirects to the corresponding STC in the SPS IMS for further details on the co ncern.   
  G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.14 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.22  
 
- 42 - Member 
responding  STC 
ID In 2021  Title Member(s) raising  Member(s) 
supporting  Primary 
subject 
keyword  First raised 
(subsequently 
raised)  Status  
China  516 New (subsequently 
raised in 2021)  China 's delay in approving 
requests for new listing and 
reinstatement of export 
establishments  Australia; Canada  European Union; 
United  Kingdom  Other concerns  25/03/2021  
(2 times)  NR 
China  524 New (subsequently 
raised in 2021)  Concerns with transparency, 
delays and due process 
associated with China's 
import requirements for 
agricultural goods  Australia  Russian Federation  Other concerns  14/07/2021  
(1 time)  NR 
China  531 New China's import restrictions 
on fishery products  Mexico   Other concerns  03/11/2021  
(0 times)  NR 
China  532 New China's import suspension of 
fresh fruits  Chinese Taipei   Plant health  03/11/2021  
(0 times)  NR 
Ecuador  498 Subsequently 
raised  Ecuador's import restrictions 
on grapes and onions  Peru  Food safety  05/11/2020  
(3 times)  NR 
Egypt  193 Subsequently 
raised  General import restrictions 
due to BSE  European Union; 
United States of 
America  Canada; Switzerland; 
Uruguay  Animal health  01/06/2004  
(42 times)  PR* 
European 
Union  382 Subsequently 
raised  European Union legislation 
on endocrine disruptors  Argentina; China; 
Dominican Republic; 
Ecuador; Guatemala; 
India; Panama; 
Paraguay; Unite d 
States of America  Australia; Benin; Brazil; 
Burkina Faso; Burundi; 
Canada; Central African 
Republic; Chile; 
Colombia; Costa Rica; 
Egypt; El Salvador; 
The Gambia; Ghana; 
Guinea; Honduras; 
Indonesia; Israel; 
Jamaica; Kenya; 
Korea,  Republic of; 
Madagascar; Malaysia; 
Mexico; Mozambique; 
New Zealand; Nigeria; 
Pakistan; Peru; 
Philippines; 
Russian  Federation; 
Senegal; Sierra Leone; 
South Africa; 
Chinese  Taipei; 
Thailand; Togo; 
Uruguay; Viet Nam; 
Zambia  Food safety  25/03/2014  
(20 times)  NR  
  G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.14 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.22  
 
- 43 - Member 
responding  STC 
ID In 2021  Title Member(s) raising  Member(s) 
supporting  Primary 
subject 
keyword  First raised 
(subsequently 
raised)  Status  
European 
Union  446 Subsequently 
raised  EU review of legislation on 
veterinary medicinal 
products  Argentina; United 
States of America  Australia; Brazil; 
Canada; Chile; 
Colombia; Japan; 
Norway; Paraguay; 
Uruguay  Food safety  12/07/2018  
(6 times)  NR 
European 
Union  448 Subsequently 
raised  EU MRLs for alpha -
cypermethrin, buprofezin, 
chlorothalonil, chlorpyrifos, 
chlorpyrifos -methyl, 
diflubenzuron, 
ethoxysulfuron, glufosinate, 
imazalil, ioxynil, iprodione, 
mancozeb, molinate, 
picoxystrobin and 
tepraloxydim  Colombia; Costa Rica; 
Côte d'Ivoire; 
Dominican Republic; 
Ecuador; Guatemala; 
India; Panama; 
Paraguay; United 
States of America  Argentina; Australia; 
Brazil; Canada; Chile; El 
Salvador; Honduras; 
Indonesia; Japan; 
Malaysia; Nicaragua; 
Peru; Philippines; 
Russian Federation; 
Turkey; Uruguay  Food safety  01/11/2018  
(8 times)  NR 
European 
Union  475 Subsequently 
raised  Modification of EU MRLs for 
plant protection products: 
Mancozeb  Colombia; Costa Rica; 
Côte d'Ivoire; Ecuador; 
Paraguay  Argentina; Brazil; 
Guatemala; Honduras; 
Mexico; Nicaragua; 
Panama; Peru  Food safety  24/06/2020  
(1 time)  NR 
European 
Union  499 Subsequently 
raised  Request for information on 
the EU Farm to Fork 
Strategy  Colombia; Guatemala  Ecuador; Indonesia; 
Paraguay; Peru  Food safety  05/11/2020  
(1 time)  NR 
European 
Union  500 Subsequently 
raised  EU proposal requiring 
residue testing of casings  Australia  Ukraine  Food safety  05/11/2020  
(1 time)  NR 
European 
Union  502 Subsequently 
raised  EU restriction on highly 
refined products imported 
from China  China   Other concerns  05/11/2020  
(1 time)  NR 
European 
Union  503 Subsequently 
raised  EU restrictions on exports of 
chocolate and cocoa 
products due to the 
application of the 
Commission Regulation 
(EU) N° 488/2014 of 12 May 
2014 Amending Regulation 
(EC) N° 1881/2006 as 
regards maximum levels of 
cadmium in foodstuff  Peru Colombia; Ecuador; 
Indonesia; Malaysia  Food safety  05/11/2020  
(3 times)  NR 
European 
Union  504 Subsequently 
raised Proposed new EU rules on 
composite products  Australia; China; 
Russian Federation; 
Chinese Taipei  Japan; New Zealand; 
Philippines; United 
States of America  Other concerns  05/11/2020  
(3 times)  NR 
European 
Union  517 New EU regulation on 
alpha -cypermethrin  Paraguay  Brazil; Colombia; 
Ecuador; India; Kenya; 
Russian Federation  Food safety  14/07/2021  
(0 times)  NR  
  G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.14 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.22  
 
- 44 - Member 
responding  STC 
ID In 2021  Title Member(s) raising  Member(s) 
supporting  Primary 
subject 
keyword  First raised 
(subsequently 
raised)  Status  
European 
Union  518 New EU's classification of 
'anthraquinone' as a 
pesticide and the MRL for 
imported tea  India  Food safety  14/07/2021  
(0 times)  NR 
European 
Union  519 New (subsequently 
raised in 2021)  EU regulatory approach to 
maximum levels for 
contaminants  Canada  United States of 
America  Food safety  14/07/2021  
(1 time)  NR 
European 
Union  520 New European Commission 
Regulation on plastic 
materials and articles 
intended to come into 
contact with food  China   Food safety  14/07/2021  
(0 times)  NR 
European 
Union  526 New EU delays in authorizing 
imports of Samgyetang 
(Korean ginseng 
chicken  soup)  Korea, Republic of   Other concerns  03/11/2021  
(0 times)  
 NR 
Guatemala  413 Subsequently 
raised  Guatemala's restrictions on 
egg products  Mexico   Food safety  27/10/2016  
(7 times)  NR 
India 479 Subsequently 
raised  India's new requirements for 
animal feed in the Food 
Safety and Standards Act, 
2006 (dated 27 January 
2020)  United States of 
America   Food safety  24/06/2020  
(4 times)  NR 
India 484 Subsequently 
raised  India's approval procedures 
for animal products  Russian Federation   Other concerns  24/06/2020  
(3 times)  NR 
India 497 Subsequently 
raised  India's import requirements 
for pulses  Canada  Russian Federation  Plant health  05/11/2020  
(3 times)  NR 
India 501 Subsequently 
raised  India's requirement for 
certificate for Non -GM origin 
and GM -free status  China; United States of 
America  Argentina; Australia; 
Brazil; Canada; Chile; 
Japan;  New Zealand; 
Paraguay; Russian 
Federation; Thailand; 
Turkey; Uruguay  Food safety  05/11/2020  
(3 times)  NR 
Indonesia  414 Subsequently 
raised  Indonesia's food safety 
measures affecting 
horticultural products and 
animal products  Philippines   Food safety  27/10/2016  
(3 times)  NR 
Indonesia  441 Subsequently 
raised  Indonesia's approval 
procedures for animal and 
plant products  European Union  Brazil; Philippines; 
United States of 
America  Other concerns  12/07/2018  
(9 times)  NR 
Japan  193 Subsequently 
raised  General import restrictions 
due to BSE  European Union; 
United States of 
America  Canada; Switzerland; 
Uruguay  Animal health  01/06/2004  
(42 times)  PR*  
  G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.14 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.22  
 
- 45 - Member 
responding  STC 
ID In 2021  Title Member(s) raising  Member(s) 
supporting  Primary 
subject 
keyword  First raised 
(subsequently 
raised)  Status  
Jordan  193 Subsequently 
raised  General import restrictions 
due to BSE  European Union; 
United States of 
America  Canada; Switzerland; 
Uruguay  Animal health  01/06/2004  
(42 times)  PR* 
Korea, 
Republic of  193 Subsequently 
raised  General import restrictions 
due to BSE  European Union; 
United States of 
America  Canada; Switzerland; 
Uruguay  Animal health  01/06/2004  
(42 times)  PR* 
Korea, 
Republic of  393 Subsequently 
raised  Korea's import restrictions 
due to African swine fever  European Union  Russian Federation  Animal health  15/07/2015  
(12 times)  NR 
Korea, 
Republic of  456 Subsequently 
raised  Korea's import restrictions 
on poultry due to highly 
pathogenic avian influenza  European Union  Russian Federation  Animal health  21/03/2019  
(4 times)  NR 
Korea, 
Republic of  490 Subsequently 
raised  Korea's lack of progress on 
pending applications for 
authorization of beef 
imports  European Union  Russian Federation  Other concerns  05/11/2020  
(1 time)  NR 
Korea, 
Republic of  513 New (subsequently 
raised in 2021)  Korea's mandatory HACCP 
certification for imported 
kimchi  China   Food safety  25/03/2021  
(1 time)  NR 
Malaysia  193 Subsequently 
raised  General import restrictions 
due to BSE  European Union; 
United States of 
America  Canada; Switzerland; 
Uruguay  Animal health  01/06/2004  
(42 times)  PR* 
Malaysia  491 Subsequently 
raised  Delays in Malaysia's 
approval procedures for 
meat and dairy imports  Russian Federation   Other concerns  05/11/2020  
(2 times)  NR 
Mexico  489 Subsequently 
raised  Mexico's import restrictions 
on pork  Brazil   Animal health  05/11/2020  
(3 times)  NR 
Mexico  507 New (subsequently  
raised in 2021  Mexico's resumption of 
frozen shrimp imports  China   Animal health  25/03/2021  
(1 time)  NR 
Mexico  514 New Mexico's restrictions on chili 
imports  India  Plant health  25/03/2021  
(0 times)  NR 
Nigeria  523 New Nigeria's import restrictions 
on meat, pork, poultry, milk 
and dairy products, genetic 
material and live cattle  Brazil   Other concerns  14/07/2021  
(0 times)  NR 
Panama  509 New (subsequently 
raised in 2021)  Panama's undue delays in 
the renewal of 
authorizations for plants of 
Peruvian fishery and 
livestock enterprises  Peru Costa Rica  Other concerns  25/03/2021  
(2 times)  NR 
Panama  512 New (subsequently 
raised in 2021)  Panama's restrictions 
regarding the procedure to 
regain access for Peruvian 
potatoes and onions  Peru Costa Rica  Other concerns  25/03/2021  
(2 times)  NR  
  G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.14 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.22  
 
- 46 - Member 
responding  STC 
ID In 2021  Title Member(s) raising  Member(s) 
supporting  Primary 
subject 
keyword  First raised 
(subsequently 
raised)  Status  
Panama  515 New (subsequently 
raised in 2021)  Panama's authorization of 
Federal Inspection Type 
establishments  Mexico  Costa Rica; Peru  Other concerns  25/03/2021  
(1 time)  R** 
Peru 528 New Peru's undue delays in the 
authorization  of dairy 
product enterprises  Panama   Other concerns  03/11/2021  
(0 times)  NR 
Philippines  466 Previously raised  The Philippines' trade 
restrictions on imports of 
meat European Union; 
Russian Federation   Animal health  07/11/2019  
(5 times)  NR 
Qatar  529 New Qatar's new import rules for 
dairy products  European Union   Food safety  03/11/2021  
(0 times)  NR 
Russian 
Federation  390 Subsequently 
raised  The Russian Federation's 
import restrictions on 
processed fishery products 
from Estonia and Latvia  European Union   Food safety  15/07/2015  
(14 times)  NR 
Russian 
Federation  508 New (subsequently  
raised in 2021 ) Russian Federation - 
Procedures for authorizing 
units eligible for export of 
fish and fish products to 
Eurasian Customs U nion India  Other concerns  25/03/2021  
(1 time)  NR 
Russian 
Federation  525 New The Russian Federation's 
classification of tea as "fruits 
and vegetables"  India  Food safety  14/07/2021  
(0 times)  NR 
Saudi 
Arabia, 
Kingdom of  486 Subsequently 
raised  Saudi Arabia's temporary 
suspension of Brazilian 
poultry exporting 
establishments  Brazil   Food safety  24/06/2020  
(4 times)  NR 
Saudi 
Arabia, 
Kingdom of  511 New  Saudi Arabia's import 
restrictions on animal and 
plant products  Turkey   Food safety  25/03/2021  
(0 times)  NR 
South Africa  193 Subsequently 
raised  General import restrictions 
due to BSE  European Union; 
United States of 
America  Canada; Switzerland; 
Uruguay  Animal health  01/06/2004  
(42 tim es) PR* 
South Africa  431 Subsequently 
raised  South Africa's import 
restrictions on poultry due 
to highly pathogenic avian 
influenza  European Union   Animal health  02/11/2017  
(10 times)  NR 
South Africa  522 New (subsequently 
raised in 2021)  South Africa's import 
restrictions on bovine meat, 
pet food and other 
by-products of animal origin  Brazil  Animal health  14/07/2021  
(1 time)  NR 
Chinese 
Taipei  193 Subsequently 
raised  General import restrictions 
due to BSE  European Union; 
United States of 
America  Canada; Switzerland; 
Uruguay  Animal health  01/06/2004  
(42 times)  PR*  
  G/SPS/GEN/804/Rev.14 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.22  
 
- 47 - Member 
responding  STC 
ID In 2021  Title Member(s) raising  Member(s) 
supporting  Primary 
subject 
keyword  First raised 
(subsequently 
raised)  Status  
Chinese 
Taipei  496 Subsequently 
raised  Chinese Taipei's 
phytosanitary risk 
assessment procedure on 
imports of fresh vegetables 
and fruits  Ukraine   Plant health  05/11/2020  
(2 times)  NR 
Chinese 
Taipei  521 New (subsequently 
raised in 2021)  Chinese Taipei's import 
restrictions on poultry  Brazil   Other concerns  14/07/2021  
(1 time)  NR 
Thailand  470 Subsequently 
raised  Thailand's phytosanitary 
restrictions on imports of 
fresh citrus fruits due to 
sweet orange scab  Japan  Chile Plant health  24/06/2020  
(3 times)  NR 
Thailand  527 New Delays in Thailand's 
approval procedures for 
animal products  Russian Federation   Other concerns  03/11/2021  
(0 times)  NR 
United 
States of 
America  193 Subsequently 
raised  General import restrictions 
due to BSE  European Union; 
United States of 
America  Canada; Switzerland; 
Uruguay  Animal health  01/06/2004  
(42 times)  PR* 
United 
States of 
America  439 Subsequently 
raised  US import restrictions on 
apples and pears  European Union   Plant health  01/03/2018  
(10 times)  NR 
United 
States of 
America  471 Subsequently 
raised  US non -recognition of the 
pest-free status in the 
European Union for Asian 
longhorn beetle and citrus 
longhorn beetle  European Union   Plant health  24/06/2020  
(4 times)  NR 
United 
States of 
America  493 Subsequently 
raised  Non-publication of US final 
rule on importation of 
sheep, goats and certain 
other ruminants  European Union   Other concerns  05/11/2020  
(3 times)  NR 
Certain 
Members  193 Subsequently 
raised  General import restrictions 
due to BSE  European Union; 
United States of 
America  Canada; Switzerland; 
Uruguay  Animal health  01/06/2004  
(42 times)  PR* 
* STC 193 is considered as resolved for Philippines; Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of; Singapore; Turkey; and Ukraine.  
** STC 515 was reported as resolved at the November 2021 SPS Committee meeting. 
  G/SPS /GEN/804/Rev.14 • G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.22  
 
- 48 - Table B.3 - STCs where substantive action occurred under the DSU in 202164 
STC 
number  Title Member(s) raising  Member(s) 
supporting  Member(s) 
responding  Primary 
subject 
keyword  First raised 
(subsequently 
raised)  Status  
185b Restrictions due to avian influenza  European Union; 
United States  Australia; Canada; 
China  India Animal health  01/03/2004  
(16 times)  PR / 
DS 430 
369b Russia's measures on live pigs and pork 
products due to African Swine Fever  European Union   Russian Federation  Animal health  25/03/2014  
(0 times)  NR / 
DS 475 
394b Costa Rica's suspension of the issuing of 
phytosanitary import certificates for 
avocados  Guatemala; Mexico  Ghana; South Africa; 
United States of 
America; Venezuela, 
Bolivarian  Republic of  Costa Rica  Plant health  15/07/2015  
(4 times)  NR / 
DS 524 
432 EU restrictions on poultry meat due to 
Salmonella detection  Brazil   European Union  Food safety  02/11/2017  
(3 times)  NR /  
DS 607  
495 Panama's import restrictions on animal 
and plant products  Colombia; Costa Rica   Panama  Other concerns  05/11/2020  
(0 times)  NR /  
DS 599  
b Panel proceedings occurred in the context of the WTO dispute settlement system. For more information, see https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/dispu_e.htm . 
 
__________  
 
64 Please no te that a hyperlink in the ID number redirects to the corresponding STC in the SPS IMS for further details on the concern.